PERKINS  LIBRARY 

Uulce   University 


Kare  Dooks 


1903 


Oift  of  Dr.  and  Mrs.  Drcd  Peacock 


'7%«-    '^x-A.  ^«!l-jk-^ 


(TV^-k^ 


\ 


^<yb:.  *» -r*. 


Jftc 


^^'^Nr^     ^*- 


K.><A^^    ..*^^       .l^^ii      -5.     \<*.    ^^_...^^;>t'^    Jl~^»^ 
^.  ^.  ,-►    Y-*^*"^ -*"~^  ~'"*v    f-t  ■■*~'^      -^  A^- tw     ..y. -*j./S*v 

\ 


*^ii>,^6«i&?^??55^^}<^j^^ 


'¥4I<^19<.^< 


/yXcJiSp^^  ;fcr  5^^  A^c^tn^  y;^^:^ 

;^-    <tA,-^-c:^  •  A^^^/^^  f<^   C^iTU,  Tn.^^  i^ru  ^^ryf^ 

'^'^Pa^i^/.JJ<yt^  K^f^:^^^  T^y^^^^-^^^-t.^^ 


<~* 


—,  y 


EXPOSITION         ^4-77 


CAUSES  AND  CHARACTER  OF  THE  DIFFICULTIES 

THE  enURCIi  1.V  Cn.iRE.ESTOJk", 

IN  THE   YEAR    1833; 

UP    TO    N0VE3IBER    2S,    OF    THAT     \'KAR 


J'O  Tin:  MEMBERS    OF   THE    METHODIST   EPISCOPAL 
CHURCH  IN  CHARLESTON,   S.  C. 

Dearly  Beloved  Brethren, 

We  deem  it  expedient  to  make  a  plain  and  candid  statement   to   you  of 
all  the  facts,  as  they  have  transpired,  which  are  necessary  to  be  known,  in 
order  to  a  full  and  tiiir  understanding  of  the  difficulties  which  so  unhappily 
exist  anioiig  usy  and  which  threaten  the  Church  with  the    painful    alterna- 
tive, either  of  disowning  some  of  her  cherished  sons,   or   sacrificing   the 
principles  of  her  economy,  and  thj  iiuthority  of  her  discipline.     In  the  ful- 
iilment  of  this  irksome  task,  we  disclaim  all  personalities.     We  studiously 
avoid  every  thi;ig  calculated  to  inflict  the  least  unnecessary  wound.     We 
K    write  out  of  the  fullness  of  our  heart,  grieved  and  troubled,  but  feeling  no 
vj,     wrath — no  personal  resentment  or  ill-will,  towards  any  brother.     Our  ob- 
v"^  jecf  is,  not  to  give  uniiocessary  offence,  but  by  presenting  the  whole  history 
^   of  tiic  case,  to  (he  best  of  our  knowledge,  vvithout  exaggeration  or  diminu- 
^    tion  of  tht>  facts,  to  prevent  such   offences  as    from  a  misapprehension    of 
N.     I'acts  might  probably  arise.     Should  the    case  transpire  to   its  worst  possi- 
^  ble  exte;it,  and  the  Church  bo  driven  to  cut  some  off  from  her  membership, 
as  her  only  alternative,  alas  for  us! — they  are  the  children  whom  God  hath 
given  us,  or  brethren  with  whom  we  have  taken  sweet  counsel,  or,  it  may 
be,  benefactors  and  chief  friends. 

Wo  are  obliged  to  prestint  this  document  to  you  in  print,  because  it  ij< 
not  practicable  to  Mrite  out  so  many  cojiios  as  are  nccossary  for  you;  but 
\vc  have  taken  all  possible  care  to  keep  it  stricllv  witinn  the  Church,  arrrl 
for  vonr  use;  onlv. 


SfATEMEyr  OF  FACTS. 

The  Quarterly  Conference  held  on  tlio  HOth  of  August  lust,  passed  tlir 
following  resolutions,  to  wit: 

^'Resolved,  That  the  Gallery  is  the  only  proper  place  for  the  slaves  hi 
our  Churches;  and  that  the  Trustees  be  requested  to  remove  the  boxes  on 
the  lower  floor,  and  place  benches  there  with  a  railing  up  the  centre  aisle, 
for  the  use  of  the  free  persons  of  color." 

^'RcsolvcJ,  That  it  is  expedient  that  there  should  be  a  small  gate  cut  on 
each  side  of  the  large  gate  leading  into  Bethel  yard,  on  a  line  with  the 
gallery  doors,  for  the  use  of  colored  persons  entering  the  Church;  and  also 
that  a  paling  fence  be  erected  in  all  our  yards,  leading  from  each  side-gate 
to  the  Church." 

^'Resolved,  That  a  Committee  be  appointed  to  communicate  the  forego- 
ing resolutioiits  to  the  Board  of  Trustees,  and  request  their  immediate  ac- 
tion  upon  them;  and  in  case  the  Trustees  are  unable  to  do  so  for  the  want 
of  funds,  the  Committee  be  instructed  to  raise  a  subscription  for  that  pur- 
pose." 

Agreeably  to  the  import  of  the  above  resolutions,  a  meeting  of  the  Board 
of  Trustees  was  called.  The  Quarterly  Conference  meeting  had  been 
held  on  Friday;  the  Societj'  meeting  was  to  be  held  on  the  next  Tuesday 
evening,  and  the  Committee  charged  with  communicating  the  resolutions 
ofthe  Quarterly  Conference  to  the  Trustees,  A\ished  the  Board  to  meet 
previously  to  the  Society  meeting.  The  Board  of  Trustees  was  accord, 
ingly  called  to  meet  on  the  afcernoon  of  Tuesday,  Sept.  3,  but  the  shortness 
of  the  notice  not  giving  time  for  some  ofthe  brethren  to  arrange  their  pri- 
vate  business,  or  having  business  of  pecuniary  urgency  which  they  could 
make  no  arrangement  to  leave  at  that  time,  there  were  but  four  members 
ofthe  Board  who  met.  This  number  was  one  less  than  a  quorum,  and  of 
course  no  business  was  transacted.  A  free  conversation  however,  took 
place  as  to  the  expediency  of  removing  the  boxes  under  the  front  gallc- 
ries,  as  proposed  in  tho  rorolution  of  the  Quarterly  Conference,  and  the 
impressio'i  on  my  mind  from  what  passed,  was,  that  thy  brethren  generally, 
not  excepting  iJie  Commiliee,  were  of  opinion,  as  I  myself  was,  that  the  reso- 
lution to  remove  the  boxes  a;id  make  sittir.gs  there  for  the  free  people  of 
color,  was  unfortunate,  ai;d  had  belter  not  be  carried  into  efl'ect.  I  consid- 
errd  it  an  evide:'.ce  of  this,  that  when  we  were  about  to  part,  the  chairman 
ofthe  Committee  handed  me  the  resolutions,  sayi;;g,  he  supposed  they  v.ould 
be  of  no  farther  use,  (or  words  to  (hat  effect,)  neither  of  his  colleagues  ob- 
jecting any  thing  to  it;  and  (hough  I  declined  taking  the  paper  from  him, 
telling  him  it  was  his  ai-d  he  should  keep  it  till  there  was  a  meeting  of  the 
Board,  he  persisted  in  urging  it  upon  me,  with  similar  words  as  before,  un- 
til  I  did  take  it.  I  was  :;cver  more  satisfied  ofthe  truth  of  any  fact,  tlian 
at  that  time  I  wv.s,  that  the  Committee  entirely  concurred  in  the  opinion  a- 
gain£,t  a  removal  ofthe  boxes;  and  when  they  left  me  I  felt  perfectly  assur- 
ed  that  they  meant  io  drop  the  matter.  Farthest  of  all  things  was  it  from 
my  thoughts,  that  the  accidental  failure  ofthe  Trustees  at  that  time  to  form 
u  quonuii,  or  the  conversation  held,  was  likely  to  be  construed  by  the  Com- 
niittee,  or  any  one  else,  either  as  an  intentional  evasion,  or  a  trial  of  strength 
.fgains!  iho  Qiiarlerly  ('(.;'ference.     As  reasonably  might  it  have  been  sup- 


posed  that  the  Committee  itself,  by  its  seeming  compliance,  intcuded  'a 
snare  for  their  brethren — a  thought  aUke  unjust,  I  doubt  not.  ss  it  would  be 
unkind. 

In  the  Society  meeting  I  adverted  to  the  subject  of  the  removal  nf  the 
boxes,  and  the  conversation  above  mentioned,  and  (it  being  a  meeting  of 
the  whites  alone)  I  took  occasion  to  make  some  remarks  intended  to  incul- 
cate  christian  charity  and  kindness  towards  the  people  of  color,  especially 
those  who  give  evidence  of  sincere  piety,  and  are  otherwise  respectable  in 
their  station.  These  remarks  gave  great  oiFence  to  some  persons,  and 
were  sadly,  and  as  I  conceived,  strangely  misinterpreted.  The  next  day 
brought  proofs  of  this,  and  among  others,  the  following  letter  from  the  com- 
mittee enclosing  a  second  copy  of  the  same  resolutions  which  they  had  left 
with  me  the  day  before. 

CHARLESTON,  SEPT.  4th,  1833. 
Rtv.  WiLLiAuM  Capers,  D.  D. 

Chairman  Board  of  Trusters. 
Rev.  Sir, — You  are  aware  that  we  have  been  appointed  to  convey  to  the  Board   of 
Trustees,  certain  resolutions  passed  by  the  Quarterly  Conference,  at  a   late   meeting   of 
that  body.     At  our  request  you  called  a  meeting  of  the  Board,  but  for  want  ofa  quorum 
no  business  was  transacted. 

Tliough  we  consider  it  extronicly  doubtful  whether  there  ever  loill  be  a  quonun  to 
transact  this  pnrticular  business — the  members  of  the  Board  being  aware  of  the  object, 
to  which  some  of  them  are  adverse — yet  we  think  it  imperatively  our  duty  to  make  one 
more  attempt  to  attain  the  object  of  our  appointment,  i.  c.  to  ascertain  whether  the  wish- 
es of  the  Conference  are  to  be  complied  with  or  not,  which  we  humbly  conceive,  is  the 
only  question  for  their  discussion,  they  havi7is;  nothing  to  do  with  the  expediency  of 
the  act  to  be  performed.  We  therefore  respectfully  request,  Rev  Sir,  that  you  will  con- 
vene the  Board  at  an  early  day,  and  lay  before  them  the  enclosed  communication. 

With  due  respect, 
We  are. 

Your  Obd't  Servants, 
F.  D.  POYAS. 
.TNO.  IT.  HONOUR. 
WILLIAIM  G.  MOOD. 

In  the  above  letter,  the  fiiilure  of  the  Trustees  to  form  a  quorum  is  flatly 
charged  to  an  intentional  delinquency.  And  though  the  language  of  the 
letter  does  not  express  in  direct  terms,  rxny  severity  or  disrespect  towards 
myself,  yet  the  roughness  and  earnestness  of  its  tone,  so  strongly  in  con- 
trast to  the  easiness  of  its  authors  some  twenty  hours  before,  led  to  a  per- 
suasion in  my  mind  that  it  owed  its  character,  if  not  its  existence,  to  some 
offence  taken,  to  my  remarks  in  the  Society  meeting.  On  the  evening  of 
the  same  da}',  I  saw  the  Committee,  and  learned  from  their  own  lips  that  it 
was  so.  They  had  not  heard  my  remarks,  being  absent  from  the  meeting, 
but  they  had  heard  o/*  them,  and  therefore  had  Mritten  the  letter.  I  tried 
to  convince  them  that  their  reporters  mi.sconceived  me,  but  they  seemed 
satisfied  I  had  more  lik<^ly  misconceived  myself.  Of  course,  I  could  not 
argue  against  that  position.  It  was  plain  to  me,  that  apart  from  the  merits 
of  the  question,  I  was  to  be  urged  to  promote  a  measure  contrary  to  my  a- 
vowed  convictions  of  right,  because  I  was  so  unfortunate  as  to  have  dis- 
plcascdf^the  membcr.s  of  the  Committee,  or  their  friends,  by  expressing  to 
the  Society  my  humble  views  of  what  I  thought^important  to  the  Chinch. 
I  was  grieved.     And  as  the  Committee  seemed  to   have  transferred  the  of- 


J{.-it^'l 


G 

feucc  olthe  Minister  m  iliargc  to  the  Cliainiiau  of  the  Hoard  ol"  Trustees, 
and  fo  be  preparing  to  punish  me  in  the  latter  capacity,  for  what  fliev  were 
pleased  to  consider  as  a  trespass  in  the  former,  I  thou«rht  it  best,  lest  the 
Tnii-tees  also  should  be  involved  in  my  affliction,  (for  there  seemed  to  be 
wrath)  to  resign  the  place  of  Chairman  of  the  Board;  M'hieh  from  courtesy 
only,  and  not  from  any  requirement  of  the  Discipline.  I  and  mv  predeces- 
sors for  sevei-al  years,  had  been  induced  to  hold.  Another  consideration 
moving  me  to  this,  was,  lest  it  should  be  thought  that  my  relation  to  the 
Board  of  Trustees  influenced  me  unduly  in  their  favor.  In  these  circum- 
stances and  with  these  views,  I  avowed  to  the  Committee  the  puritvof  m\ 
motives  in  my  address  at  the  Society  meeting:  my  innocency  of  any  inten- 
tional offence  to  any  brother;  and  that  if  in  the  judgment  of  those  who  hoard 
me  without  bias,  I  iiad  said  what  might  reasonably  oflend,  I  was  ready  to 
ask  an}-  brotlier's  pardon  before  the  Society,  or  even  from  the  pulpit.  My 
address  in  the  Society  meeting  was  delivered  by  me  not  as  Chairman  of 
the  Board  of  Trustees,  but  ;is  Minister  in  charge,  in  which  relation  I  had 
the  undoubted  right,  (and  it  was  no  less  my  duty,)  there  to  give  expression 
to  what  I  thought  important  to  the  spiritual  interest  of  the  Church.  I  had 
done  no  more  than  this,  in  the  present  matter.  I  felt  that  I  had  delivered 
my  own  soul,  and  farther  I  would  not  act.  I  told  them  peremptorily,  that 
they  should  no  longer  look  to  me  for  a  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Trustees. 
They  seemed  however,  determined  to  force  me  to  it;  and  just  one  week 
after  this  interview,  I  received  from  them  the  following  letter. 

CHARLESTON,  SEPT.  11th,  1833. 
Rev.  Dr.  Capers, 

Dear  Brother, — Tn  our  last  conversation  you  remarked  that  the  Quarterly  Confe- 
rence was  not  the  Church,  and  that  the  members  of  the  Church  were  not  favorable  to 
the  measure  contemplated  in  the  resolutions  of  the  Conference  relati^e  to  the  occupancy, 
by  colored  persons,  of  certain  seats  in  our  Chapels.  We  thought  otherwise,  and  deter- 
mined to  obtain  an  expression  of  the  opinions  of  the  members  on  that  subject,  as  far  as 
we  could;  we  therefore  drew  up  a  paper,  the  purport  of  which  was,  that  the  members 
of  the  Church  approved  of  the  resolutions  passed  by  the  Conference,  and  recommending 
that  they  be  carried  into  immediate  effect.  Our  business  would  not  allow  us  to  devote 
much  time  to  obtaining  signatures  , added  to  which,  we  are  unacquainted  with  a  large 
proportion  of  the  members,  and  know  not  where  to  find  them.  We  have  however  pro- 
cured the  signatures  of  a  very  respectable  number,  (nearly  all  thewja/e  members)  whose 
names  are  sent  herewith,  a  number  which  we  think  amply  sutficient  to  answer  the  object 
we  have  in  view.  We  send  you  a  transcript  of  the  names,  the  original  signatures  are  in 
our  possession,  subject  to  your  inspection  at  any  time. 

In  asking  for  signatures  to  this  expression  of  the  views  of  the  members,  we  have  met 
with  but  few,  very  few  refusals.  But  two  declined  signing  because  they  were  opposed 
to  the  ine;isure,  the  others  from  various  reasons — some  because  they  thought  the  resolu- 
tions showed  the  free  persons  of  color  too  much  favor,  by  allowing  them  to  occupy  seats 
on  the  lower  floor  at  all;  others  because  they  understood  that  you  were  opposed  to  the 
measure  and  were  fearful  of  giving  offence — and  others  again  because  they  thought  it 
unnecessary,  as  the  Conference  possessed  ample  power  to  act  on  the  subject  as  they 
thought  best. 

From  all  that  we  can  learn — and  we  have  taken  some  pains  to  obtain  correct  infor- 
mation— we  feel  warranted  in  saying,  that  at  least  nine-tenths  of  the  members  approve  of 
the  plan,  indeed  are  an.\ious  that  it  should  be  carried  into  effect;  it  remains  to  bo  seen 
whether  their  wishes  will  be  complied  with  or  not. 

Thus  we  have  performed  what  we  conceive  to  bo  our  duty  to  the  Conference  and  to 
the  Church.  Should  this  remonstrance  (for  such  we  think  it  may  with  propriety  be  call- 
ed) be  treated  with  neglect,  we  fear  the   consetpionces  will  be  serious.     Wc   sincerely 


iiupe  however,  that  the  propriety  of  submitting  to  the  wishes  of  the  Church  will  be  so 
manifest,  that  tiiere  will  be  no  further  hesitation,  and  that  there  may  yet  prevail  "peace 
;imong  the  hrethren,  and  love  with  faith,  from  God  the  Father  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

Very  Respectfully, 

F.  I).  POYAS. 
JNO.  H.  HONOUR. 
WILLIAM  G.  aiOOD. 

The  paper  mentioned  in  the  above  letter,  and  wliich  was  very  numcr- 
GU.sly  signed,  by  men  and  women,  boys  and  girls,  is  as  follows. 

"The  Quarterly  Conference  of  the  IMethodist  Episcopal  Church  in  Charleston,  having 
passed  certain  resolutions,  which  appropriate  the  galleries  in  our  Chapels  for  the  occu- 
pancy of  slaves;  and  providing  that  benches  supply  the  places  of  the  boxes  on  the  lower 
floor,  for  the  use  of  free  persons  of  color:  and  also  recommending  that  line  fences  be  e- 
rected  to  separate  the  entrance  into  the  Churches  between  the  whites  and  colored:  We, 
the  undersigned  members  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  highly  approve  of  the  plan 
adopted  by  the  Conference,  and  should  the  Trustees  fail  to  carry  it  into  immediate  ef- 
fect, the  Committee  appointed  by  the  Conference  are  hereby  authorised  and  requested 
fo  do  so. 

"Charleston,  Sept.  5,  1833." 

The  following  letters  exhibit  the  whole  corrcsporidencc  which  eu.sued 
between  myself  and  the  Committee. 

TARSONAGE,  SEPT.  12,  1833. 

Dear  Urethrkn — I  have  received  your  letter  and  the  accompanying  document. 
1  feel  mortified  and  grieved  at  the  course  you  have  taken.  Can  it  be  possible  that  all  thiis 
has  been  done  merely  with  a  view  to  convince  me  that  1  was  mistaken  when  1  expressed 
a  doubt  whether  the  members  of  the  Church  collectively  would  recommend,  under  exis- 
ting circumstances,  the  immediate  execution  of  your  plan  of  the  seats?  What  a  pity 
that  so  much  pains  could  not  have  been  employed  for  some  more  certain  good — as  for 
example,  seeing  each  member  of  your  classes  once  a  week  regularly  and  constantly,  to 
advise,  reprove,  comfort,  or  exhort  them.  Is  it  possible  that  you  who  have  so  little 
fime  for  such  a  service,  can  have  seen  two  hundred  and  sixty  members  of  the  church, 
and  got  their  names,  men  and  women,  boys  and  girls,  in  less  than  a  week.'  I  presume 
not.  But  if  you  did  this  by  others,  how  do  you  assure  yourselves  or  me  of  the  views  and 
reasons  «f  the  signers  of  your  paper.'  How  do  you  know  that  they  were  fully  informed 
•f  all  the  material  circumstances  of  the  case,  and  so  were  prepared  to  act  discreetly  on 
the  subject?  It  is  not  long  since  numerous  signatures  were  procured,  on  a  much  less 
doubtful  occasion  than  the  present,  most  of  which,  I  believe,  would  have  been  refused, 
had  the  persons  been  favored  with  a  full  understanding  of  the  circumstances  of  the  case. 
I  deplore  this  whole  course  of  proceeding.  It  may  be  proper  enough  for  political 
clubs  for  ought  I  know,  but  thoroughly  mischievous,  calculated  to  engender  partyism, 
and  subvert  all  order,  in  the  Christian  Church.  Surely  brethren,  you  did  not  consider. 
What  church  could  abide  in  peace,  if,  whenever  a  dithcult  and  distracting  question  should 
arise,  deeply  interesting  to  her  spiritual  interests,  and  which  should  be  found  grave 
enough  to  perplex  her  most  experienced  ministers,  and  the  most  sober  and  reflecting  of 
her  members,  it  should  be  submitted  to  the  adjudication,  at  first  sight,  of  boys  and 
girls,  minors,  (as  a  large  proportion  of  your  signers  are)  by  whoever  might  be  adventurous 
enough  to  hawk  about  a  paper  from  one  to  another  privately,  and  get  their  signatures  ex 
parte?  And  in  the  present  case,  1  am  grieved  to  learn,  that  such  has  been  the  rage  to 
get  subscribers,  that  even  the  Sunday  Schoolchildren,  and  Sunday  School  hours,  have 
not  been  spared! 

But  your  letter  tells  me  it  all  has  proceeded  from  my  having  expressed  a  doubt  as  to 
what  the  church  might  will  in  the  case.  Permit  me  then,  now  to  express  my  great 
regret,  that  whereas  so  nmch  was  accorded  in  resiiect  to  a  single  unlucky  doubt  of  mine, 
some  other  doubts,  and  even  strong  convictions  ol  judgment  which  I  then  expressed,  and 
to  which  you  answered  nothing,  could  not  have  had  a  share  of  your  consideration.  1 
told  you,  in  eflect,  I  was  fully  persuaded  we  were  not  in  a  situation  to  settle  the   matter 


satisfactorily  any  way.  I  was  sati^^ed,  both  from  the  notes  I  had  received,  and  the 
misapprehension  of  my  well-meant  remarks  in  the  Society  meeting,  as  reported  to  me 
by  yourselves,  there  was  too  much  agitation,  not  to  say  passion,  prevalent,  to  make  it 
desirable  to  pursue  the  matter  furtlier  for  the  present,  and  that  1  had  determined  to  do 
no  more  in  it.  1  believed  the  interests  of  religion  among  us,  required  this  of  me,  and  1 
believe  so  still. 

It  is  not  apparent  what  character  you  attribute  to  the  document  which  you  have  sent 
me — whether  it  be  ajithoritativc,  as  the  voice  of  the  church  which  you  would  oblige 
me  to  obey;  or  persuasive,  as  evidence  of  the  wish  of  the  church.  I  cannot  consider 
it,  however,  in  eith<?r  character.  In  the  former  respect  I  cannot  consider  it,  because,  to 
mention  no  more,  it  is  expre.-)<ive  of  no  act  of  the  church.  In  the  second,  I  cannot  con- 
sider it,  because  1  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  the  persons,  whose  names  I  sec,  were 
generally  well  apprised  of  what  they  were  ;ibout,  and  all  the  important  circumstances 
and  bearings  of  the  measure  which  they  seem  to  recommend.  So  far  from  it,  I  am  fully 
persuaded  many  of  them  were  not;  probably  few,  if  any  of  them  were.  On  the  other 
hand,  I  feel  myself  bound  to  disrejard,  and  even  rebuke  it,  because  it  is  wholly  wrong 
and  mischievous,  first  and  last.  It  is  a  precedent  of  unexampled  evil  tendency,  calcula- 
ted to  bring  into  the  bosom  of  the  church,  the  spirit  of  jjarty,  anarchy  and  strife,  to  the 
subversion  of  all  unity,  order  and  peace.  For  God's  sake,  brethren,  pause,  and  take 
counsel.  Though  1  be  as  a  fool,  and  you  are  wise,  yet  have  a  care  lest  you  fall  into 
grievous  error.  Such  as  I  am,  I  belong  wholly  to  the  church,  and  have  lived  and  la- 
bored for  nothing  else.  I  feci  my  responsibility  in  the  ollice  which  I  occupy,  and  can- 
not suffer  you  to  proceed  in  a  course  which  must  be  mischievous,  without  warning  you 
earnestly  and  afl'ectionately  to  desist.  You  have  done  very  wrong.  I  love  you  sincere- 
ly, and  am  grieved  for  your  misconduct.  I  beseech  you  desist  from  agitating  the  church; 
and  follow  things  which  make  for  peace. 

In  the  close  of  your  letter  you  say,  "should  this  remonstrance  (for  such  we  think  it 
may  with  propriety  be  called)  be  treated  with  neglect,  we  fear  the  consequences  will  be 
serious."  I  know  not  what  consequences  you  may  anticipate,  but  be  they  what  they 
may,  as  far  as  they  result  from  a  necessity  of  your  own  creation,  to  which  1  have  not 
been  a  party,  and  which,  in  view  of  any  imaginable  anticipations  of  yours,  would  oblige 
me  either  to  do  evil  that  good  may  come,  or  to  do  evil  that  evil  may  be  prevented,  1 
must  beg  to  be  excused  the  consideration  of  them.  If  you  had  anticipated  evil,  the 
greater  is  the  pity  for  the  indiscretion  of  your  course,  in  not  having  provided  against  it. 
If  you  set  yourselves  to  contrive  adileniiiia  for  iiic,  you  cannot  complain  at  finding  your- 
selves involved  in  it.  I  cannot  rush  forward,  and  will  not  be  pushed  forward,  against 
my  own  convictions  of  the  right  and  my  duty,  and  myself  do  an  evil  to  prevent  the  ap- 
prehended consequences  of  an  evil  done  by  others — especially  too,  in  a  case  where  those 
others  have  so  totally  superseded,  aud  set  aside,  both  me,  and  my  views  of  the  case.  I 
consider  the  whole  course  you  have  pursued,  as  proceeding  from  indiscretion;  and  hope, 
and  pray,  that  nothing  worse  may  apply  to  it,  or  come  of  it. 

I  am,  brethren,  very  sincerely, 

Your  afi'cctionate  pastor, 

W.  CAPERS. 


CHARLESTON,  SEPT.  13,  1833. 
Rev.  Dr.  Capers — 

Dear  Brother, — Your  letter,  under  date  of  yesterday,  is  at  hand.  We  may  well  adopt 
your  own  language,  and  say,  we  "feel  mortified  and  grieved  at  the  course  you  have 
taken."  Grieved  indeed,  that  our  motives  should  be  so  greatly  misconstrued,  and  mor- 
tified, that  our  pastor  should  deem  it  necessary  to  resort  to  language,  which,  in  our  hum- 
ble conception,  is  totally  unbecoming  a  Christian  Minister.  You  have  charged  us  most 
unjustly  with  possessing  feelings,  and  performing  acts,  at  which  a  heathen  might  blush; 
and  were  we  so  disposed,  wc  might  make  such  remarks  upon  your  want  of  charity,  as 
would  not  be  very  agreeable  to  your  feelings.  l?ut  we  forbear.  Our  regard  for  you  as 
a  man,  and  the  relation  which  jou  sustain  towards  us  as  our  pastor,  alike  forbid  that  we 
should  retort  your  very  uncourteous  language.  We  shall  content  ouiselveswith  briefly  re- 
marking upon  such  TpMts  of  your  letter  as  are  not  in  accordance  with  the  Hicts  in  the  case. 


9 

\ou  ask,  "what  church  could  abide  in  peace,  if,  whcuevier  a  diiHcult  and  distiacjtiag 
•inestion  should  arise,  deeply  interesting  to  iier  spiritual  interests,  and  which  should  be 
(bund  grave  enough  to  perplex  her  most  experienced  ministers,  and  the  most  sober  and 
reflecting  of  her  iiieuibers,  it  sl.ould  be  submitted  to  the  adjudication,  at  first  sight,  of 
boys  and  girls,  minors,'"  fee.  Permil  us  to  aslc  in  return,  what  "experienced  ministers,'" 
what  "sober  and  reflecting  members,"  have  found  this  so  very  ditlicult,  distracting,  and 
perplexing  a  question?  A'ot  the  Presiding  Elder  of  the  Charleston  District!  Not  the 
preachers  on  the  Charleston  station!  Not  the  mi!n  who  occupy  seats  in  the  highest  body 
known  to  the  church  in  this  place!  Not  any  or  all  of  these,  for  they  with  one  consent, 
determined  on  the  proper  course  to  Ik;  pui-sued,  after  a  calm  and  full  investigation  of  the 
subject,  and  appointed  us  to  pursue  that  course  in  their  name;  for  doing  which,  all  this 
obloquy  and  reproach  has  been  heaped  upon  us. 

And  who,  or  where,  are  the  "boys  and  girls,  minors,"  to  whose  "adjudication  nt  first 
sight,''''  this  "perplexing"  question  has  been  submitted.'  Of  the  "2(iO"  signers, can  you 
point  out  twenty  such.'  We  trow  not.  Surely,  dear  brother,  you  did  not  examine  the 
names  when  you  ventured  this  broad  assertion.  1-ook  and  see  if  the  names  of  some  of 
the  oldest,  aye,  the  rrr;/ oW<».>;/ and  most  respectable  members  of  the  church  are  not 
there!  ~1  large  proportion  of  boj/s  and  girls,  7)iinors.'.'.'  Certainly  you  have  not 
examined  the  paper  with  that  attention  to  which  it  is  entitled. 

You  throw  out  a  taunt  respecting  the  non-performanre  of  ourduty  as  Class-leaders. — 
We  are  not  conscious  of  deserving  it.  If  we  ivrrc  negligent  in  this  matter,  your  obli- 
gations as  minister  in  charge,  reqiiired  that  jou  should  pursue  a  very  dilTerent  course. 

With  respect  to  the  character  of  the  "document."  You  will  not  regard  it  even  as 
"persuasive,  as  evidence  of  the  wish  of  the  Church,"  because,  forsooth,  you  have  no 
reason  to  believe  that  the  signers  knew  what  they  were  about..  Quite  complimentary, 
truly!  Did  not  the  paper  itself  most  plainly  and  explicitly  state  the  object  upon  its  very 
face.'  Or  do  you  think  so  meanly  of  the  members,  as  to  suppose  they  would  sign  a  pa- 
per without  knowing  what  it  was.'  Or  do  you  suppose  (and  perhaps  this  is  coming  uigh- 
esl  to  the  mark)  that  the  Charleston  IVIethodists  are  such  stupid  ignoramuses,  as  not  to 
know  what  is  what.'  We  say  nothing  of  tlie  ungenerous  insinuation,  that  tec  used  de- 
ceptive measures  to  obtain  signatures.  But  you  will  not  only  not  consider  it  as  either 
authoritative  or  persuasive,  but  you  will  even  disregard  and  rebuke  the  members  of 
the  church,  for  presuming  to  express  their  wishes  on  a  subject  in  which  they  leel  deeply 
interested.  We  know  as  little  about  political  clubs  as  you  do,  but  if  this  does  not  squint 
mightily  towards  despotism,  we  are  nmch  mistaken.  Have  a  care,  brother,  that  you  do 
not  sutler  your  passion  to  get  the  better  of  your  judgment. 

We  notice  your  sneering  remark  respecting  our  wisdom,  and  thank  you  for  your  ad- 
vice to  us  to  take  counsel.  We  pretend  not  to  be  wise:  of  the  philosophy  of  the  schools 
we  know  nothing;  but  we  do  claim  to  have  some  few  grains  of  common  sense;  and  we 
have  taken  counsel,  (not  of  mnlattoes  to  be  sure.)  We  have  not  acted  hastily  or  un- 
advisedly as  you  seem  to  suppose,  but  have  carefully  examined  the  subject  ourselves,  and 
taken  the  opinions  of  those  whom  we  regard  as  having  some  pretensions  to  wisdom,  and 
to  whose  opinions  you  yourself  would  show  some  deference;  and  the  result  is,  that  de- 
cency, propriety,  decorum,  custou),  and  every  tiling  else,  require  that  a  distinct  line 
should  be  drawn  between  the  whites  and  mnlattoes  in  our  chapels,  and  that  it  be  doue 
speedily. 

Vou  charge  us  very  unjustly  with  contriving  a  dilemma  for  you,  and  say  we  should 
not  complain  if  wc  find  ourselves  involved  in  it.  We  have  contrived  no  dilemma  for 
you;  if  you  are  in  one,  it  is  of  your  own  creation.  When  the  subject  of  colored  persons 
occupjing  the  seats  of  whites,  was  spoken  of  again  and  again  at  the  Loader's  meetings, 
you  expressed  a  firm  determination  to  have  nothing  to  do  with  it,  as  it  was  no  part  of  the 
business  of  a  minister,  but  belonged  solely  to  the  membership.  Why  did  you  not  adhere 
to  that  resolution?  Why,  when  the  members  took  the  subject  in  hand,  and  expressed  a 
determination  to  go  througli  with  it,  did  you  interfere,  and  obstruct  thorn  in  their  course? 
If  you  had  permitted  the  members  to  act,  and  not  have  interfered  with  what  you  your- 
self declared  was  no  part  of  your  duty,  the  business  would  have  been  settled  before  this, 
quietly  and  peaceably. 

Permit  us  to  mention  some  of  the  consequences  that  may  result  from  this  business, 
unless  it  be  satisfactorily  adjusted;  and  we  beg  that  you  will  calmly  and  dispassionately 
consider  them. 

If  colored  persons  are  allowed  to  sit  among  the;  white  members,  we  have  reason  to  be- 


10 

iieve  that  uol  a  tew  olllic  latlrr  will  leave  tlie  cliarcli.  This  jou  may  con-'ider  a  small 
iimtter;  and  so  it  is,  when  compared  with  what  will  probably  ensne.  You  know  that 
ihere  are  men  ciiou«:h  in  Charleston,  who  will  gladly  avail  themselves  of  any  thing  that 
may  tend  to  injure  the  .Methodist  Cliarch,  and  bring  it  into  disrepute.  Now  then,  sup- 
pose a  considerable  number  of  the  mcnibcrH  resign,  for  llie  avowed  reason  that  they  are 
compelled,  contrary  to  their  views  of  propriety,  to  associate  with  a  clas-*  of  persons,  be- 
tween whom  and  the  whites,  the  law  has  drawn  a  broad  line  of  demarcation,  and  who 
are  regarded  by  the  public  authorities  with  a  suspicious  eye.  Think  you  it  will  not  be 
seized  on  with  avidity  by  the  enemies  of  the  church,  as  a  pretext  for  atfording  them  rea- 
son to  believe  that  there  is  "something  rotten  in  Dcnniarl;?"  Will  not  all  the  changes 
possible  be  rung  upon  it,  to  make  the  public  believe  that  the  Methodist  ministry  are  de- 
signing men,  of  whom  they  sliould  beware?  How  would  it  read  in  a  public  print,  that 
a  number  of  the  members  of  the  .Methodist  C  hurch  had  seceded  from  her  communion, 
simply  because  their  feelings  as  Carolinians  would  not  permit  tliem  to  sit  side  by  side  in 
their  public  assemblies,  with  mulattoes!  And  then  what  would  become  of  your  black 
«.lasse.*?  Aye,  what  would  become  of  your  black  missions?  Think  not  these  are  im- 
ages conjured  up  from  the  "vasty  deep,"  lo  affright  you.  They  are  not  the  fancied 
creatures  of  a  dL<tempered  brain,  nor  arc  they  idle  imaginings.  Think  of  these  things, 
dear  brother;  ponder  them  in  your  mind.  We  know  that  you  are  apt  to  act  hastily,  but 
we  beseech  you,  us  you  care  for  the  church,  (and  we  know  that  her  prosperity  is  her 
chief  joy)  calmly  consider  these  thing-,  and  may  God  give  you  a  right  understanding  in 
all  thijigs. 

For  ourselves,  we  love  Methodism.  We  cherish  it  in  our  heart  of  hearts;  and  it  is 
because  we  do  so,  that  we  have  acted  as  we  have.  We  believe  the  vital  interests  of 
the  church  are  in  jeopardy,  and  we  cannot  sit  down  supinely  and  indifferent,  without 
raising  an  arm,  and  a  voice  in  her  defence;  however  impotent  that  arm  may  be,  or  how- 
ever feeble  may  be  the  sound  of  that  voice. 

We  are  utterly  unable  to  comprehend  your  allusion  to  the  "numerous  signatures  pro- 
cured on  a  much  less  doubtful  occasion,"  &c. 

We  iterate  most  heartily  your  professions  of  love  and  regard.  It  is  no  pleasant  tl.ing 
to  come  in  collision  with  you,  and  nothing  but  what  we  consider  our  bounden  duty  to 
the  church,  could  induce  us  to  act  as  we  have.  We  beg,  however,  that  you  will  dis- 
tinctly understand,  that  we  intend  nothing  personal  in  our  remarks.  We  do  not  address 
William  Capers,  but  the  riiinister  it  charge  of  the  .'\Iethodist  Church. 

In  conclusion,  we  would  remark,  that  we  may  be  wrong;  we  think  we  are  right. — 
We  know  that  we  have  no  sinister  motive  to  serve,  and  that  the  prosperity  of  our  Zion 
fe  the  sole  object  we  have  in  view. 

We  are,  very  sincerely. 

Yours  most  affectionately, 

F.  D.  roVAf". 
Ji\0.  U.  IIONOIK. 
W1LLIA.'\I  G.  MOOD. 


PARSO.XAGE,  SEPT.  14.  1833. 

J>K.\R  Bhetiirkn, — 1  .should  have  .spoken  to  you  instead  of  writing  my  former  let- 
ter, but  1  thought  words  put  down  on  paper  would  be  least  liable  to  misconstruction,  or 
if  not,  could  be  reconsidered  with  greater  certainty.  You  will  phase  accept  only  so  much 
as  this  sentence  in  reply  to  all  the  epithets  contained  in  your  present  letter  to  me. 

There  are  some  mistakes  in  your  letter,  the  correction  of  which  may  change  your 
views  of  a  much  more  important  matter,  namely,  the  course  of  your  own  conduct;  and 
in  hope  of  this,  and  that  convinced  of  your  error,  you  will  forthwith  correct  it,  I  will  con- 
fine myself  to  pointing  out  those  mistakes. 

Ycu  quote  from  my  letter  as  follows — "What  church  could  abide  in  peace  if  when- 
ever a  difficult  and  distracting  question  should  arise,  deeply  interesting  to  her  spiritual 
interests,  and  which  should  be  found  grave  enough  to  perplex  her  most  experienced' 
Ministers,  and  the  most  sober  and  reflecting  of  her  members,  it  should  be  submitted  to 
tlie  adjudication,  af^;s<  sj'g/i^,  of  boys  and  girls,  minors."  To  this  quotation  you  re- 
ply by  denying  that  there  exists  any  such  diflicult  or  perplexing  question,  or,  any  such 
perplexity  with  respect  to  a  question,  of  which  you  say  that  the   Quarterly   Conference 


11 

(leterniiucd  on  the  propei-  course  to  be  pursued,  and  appointed  you  to  pursue  tliat  course 
in  its  name.  You  have  here  made  two  mistakes,  both  of  which  are  material  to  a  right 
understanding  of  the  matter  in  hand.  The  first  is,  respecting  </)e  question  now  involv- 
ed, what  it  is;  and  the  second,  as  to  the  object  of  your  appointment  by  the  Quarterly 
Conference,  and  the  duties  assigned  you. 

First.  With  respecl  \o  the  question — My  remark  was  not  intended  of  that  which 
had  been  submitted  to  the  CiuRrterJy  Conference,  simply  as  it  then  stood,  whether  tlic 
free  peopleof  color  had  not  belter  be  seated  where  tlie  boxes  are  under  the  galleries,  but 
as  it  afterwards  became  embarrassed.  With  respect  to  the  question  before  the  Quar- 
terly Conference,  disencumbered  of  other  matter,  I  should  be  indill'erent,  if  not  even  fa- 
vorable to  it;  Init  circumstances  alter  cases,  and  so  with  the  present  question.  This  will 
appear  more  distinctly  in  the  sequel. 

The  second  mistake  consists  of  two  particulars,  in  both  of  which  you  are  equally 
wrong.  First,  the  ol)iect  of  your  appointment  by  the  Quarterly  Conference,  and  second- 
\y,  the  duties  appropriated  to  you  with  respect  to  that  object. 

1st.  The  object  of  your  appointment.  You  seem  to  consider  this  as  liaving  been  that 
you,  in  the  name  of  tiie  Quarterly  Conference,  should  efi'ect  the  change  of  the  sittings  in 
the  churches;  but  such  was  not  tlie  object  of  the  Quarterly  Conference.  It  was  there 
stated,  by  myself,  and  no  one  contradicted  it,  that  any  change  appertaining  to  the  build- 
ings was  appropriate  to  the  functions  of  the  I'oard  of  Trustees.  The  members  of  tho 
Board  wore  not  present  Cexceptone.  who  declined  saying  any  tiling,  and  I  believe,  with- 
drew during  the  debate)  so  thattlie  Conference  could  not  get  information  of  their  views. 
I  also  stated,  from  my  knowledge  of  the  fiscal  aflairsofthe  Church,  that  the  Tiustecs, 
however  rcadv  thev  might  i)e  to  fa\or  tlie  wish  of  tlie  Quarterly  (Conference,  probably, 
Jiad  no  money  which  was  not  wanted  to  meet  engagements  then  .standing.  Accordingly 
you  were  appointed  for  the  purpose  of  formally  communicating  to  the  Trustees  tho  re- 
quest (not  tho  o/'^rr)  of  the  Conference  respecting  the  sittings  for  <ree  colored  people^ 
and  for  the  further  purpose  of  obviating  the  diliiculty  which  it  liad  been  suggested  might 
arise  from  the  Trustees  not  iiaving  monev  in  iiand  to  defray  the  expense  of  the  contem- 
j)lated  change.  So  far  then,  as  the  efFccting  of  a  change  of  tlie  sittings  in  the  Churches 
can  have  been  an  •bject  of  your  appointment,  it  can  have  been  so  only  as  you  might 
give  weight  and  form  to  the  expression  of  the  wisli  of  the  Conference  in  the  case.  As  to 
the  second  particular,  viz.  the  duties  appropriate  to  vour  appointment,  farther  than  repre- 
senting the  wish  of  the  Conference  to  the  Board  of  Trustees,  as  above  slated,  they  were 
whollv  contingent,  and  consisted  in  this,  that  in  case  the  Trustees  should  be  unable  to 
I'urnish  monev  for  the  work,  \  ou  were  to  raise  it  for  them  by  a  subscription.  The  reso- 
lution under  which  vou  were  appointed  proves  explicitly  that  no  other  duties  were  as- 
signed to  '.  ou,  nor  any  other  objects  than  as  above,  contemplated  in  your  appointment. 

The  resolution  is  as  follows — 

"7?p.to/i'rr/,  That  a  Committee  be  appointed  to  coinmunicufe  the  foregoing  resolutions 
to  the  Board  of  Trustees,  and  request  their  immediate  action  upon  them;  and  in  case  the 
'J'nistops  are  unable  to  do  so  for  the  want  of  funds,  the  Committee  be  instructed  lo  raise 
a  subscription  for  that  purpose." 

l?e  well  assured  therefore  brethren,  that  I  have  not  blamed  vou  for  pursuing  the  object, 
or  fulfilling  the  duties  of -our  appointment  bv  the  Quarterly  Conference,  but  for  making 
them  the  unauthorised  occasion  of  a  procedure  in  which  \  ou  have  alike  superseded  the 
lesolulion  under  which  you  profess  to  act,  the  Trustees,  and  all  known  regulations  or 
usages  of  Church  order. 

Once  more — with  respect  to  (he  question  (that  is,  the  question  as  intended  in  my 
former  letter,  quoted  above;)  your  mistake  widens  as  you  proceed  in  vour  letter.  Pre- 
dicting consequence's,  you  say,  "How  would  it  read  in  a  public  print  that  a  number  of 
monilicrs  of  the  I\Iethodi.st  (^hurch  had  seceded  from  her  communion,  simply  because 
their  feelings  as  Carolinians  would  not  permit  tlicni  to  sit  side  by  side  in  their  public  as- 
semblies with  inulattoes."  You  even  suppose  that  a  number  of  members  may  leave  the 
church  "fertile  avowed  reason  that  they  are  compelled,  contjary  to  their  views  of  pro- 
priety, to  associate  with  a  class  of  persons  between  whom  and  the  whites  the  law  has 
drawn  a  inoad  line  of  demarcation."  Now  of  this,  I  can  only  say  that  so  far  from  a 
question  whether  the  whiti^s  should  be  compelled  to  associate  with  mulattocs  in  the 
churches,  I  h.ave  never  heard  a  question  agitated  among  us  that  would  jicrmit  such  a 
thing,  t'o  far  from  it,  every  body  complain<,  and  no  one  more  loudly  than  m  self,  that 
there  are  a  parcel  of  wenches,  chiefly  lewd  women  I  believe,  who,  as    coiTha        li*  "o'n' 


12 

order  as  lo  propriety,  ubirudc  lheiii-^elve.s  into  llie  sittings  appropriated  for  ladies;  liiil 
none  of  the  gentlenn-n  will  be  kind  enough  to  use  their  Carolina,  or  any  other  feelings, 
Jo  rid  our  wives  and  daughters  of  the  scandalous  intrusion.  Nor  is  tliere  the  lea>t  like- 
lihood that  any  different  arrangement  of  the  seats  from  the  present  one,  would  elVcct  a 
remedy  of  the  evil.  The  decent  and  orderly  people  of  color  only,  would  observe  it  (as 
they  iiavf  done  our  present  order)  while  the  rest  would  continue  to  do  .-ls  they  now  do, 
seating  themselves  intention;illy  out  of  place.  The  unauthorised  and  scandalous  intru- 
sions of  these  wenches  excepted,  1  am  sure  the  line  of  demarcation  between  the  sittings 
of  the  colored  people  and  the  whites  is  as  broad  in  the  IMetliodist  Church  as  in  any  other 
in  the  city.  \Ve  make  no  question  (never  did,  and  never  can)  whether  the  whites  and 
colored  ou^ht  to  sit  side  by  side  in  the  churches. 

Another  mistake  which  oujlit  to  be  corrected,  respects  my  having  said  I  iiad  no  reasons 
to  believe  that  the  pei-sons  who  signed  the  paper  you  sent  me  were  generally  well  appri- 
sed of  what  they  were  about,  and  all  the  important  circumstances  and  bearings  of  the 
measure  they  seemed  to  recommend.  This  was  said  neither  for  "compliment"  nor  the 
reverse;  bnt  just  for  the  naked  truth's  sake.  Your  mistakes  led  them  unsuspectinclv  in- 
to error,  as  appeared  on  the  face  of  the  document.  The  wording  of  that  paper  imports 
ll'.at  the  Quarterly  Conference  had  ordered  the  change  of  the  sittings,  and  appointed  you 
le  execute  their  order;  and  the  good  peopli-  (not  excepting  the  children)  signed  their 
names,  doubtless,  confiding  in  the  accuracy  of  the  rcpn-sentations  there  n)ade,  and  mean- 
ing to  confirm  the  will  of  the  Conference  as  expressed  in  its  resolutions.  The  p.-iper. 
however,  was  so  fniltily  framed  as  at  the  same  time  to  approve  of  the  resolutions,  and 
provide  for  their  direct  subversion. 

Another  mistake,  close  following  this,  is,  that  I  disregarded  and  rebuked  the  members 
of  the  Church  for  j)resuniing  to  express  their  wishes  on  a  subject  in  whicli  tliey  feel 
deeply  interested.  I  disregarded  the  document  vou  sent  me,  because  it  was  all  wrong,  but 
1  did  notdisregard  the  members  of  the  Church;  and  Irelniked  not  thmi,  but  the  faulty 
procedure  by  which  their  names  had  been  gotten  to  a  paper  which  seems  to  approve  of 
the  resolutions  of  the  Quarterly  Conference  onlv  to  set  them  aside  and  art  another    way. 

.\notlier  mistake,  and  the  last  1  shall  notice,  leads  you  to  accuse  me  of  interfering  to 
prevent  the  lay  authorities  oftlie  church  from  acting;  and  i\va\.  after  \  had  made  repeated 
ileclarations  that  1  considered  the  matter  as  belonging  rightfully  to  their  adjudication.  I 
have  done  nothing  to  prevent  the  regular  action  of  the  lay  authorities  of  the  church,  nor 
will  I,  in  any  matter  which  is  appropriate  to  them.  What  I  have  done,  and  mean  to  do, 
is  only  directed  against  your  indiscretion,  by  which  all  the  functionaries  of  the  church, 
lay  and  clerical  alike,  should  be  superseded.  I  judge  the  present  authorities  can  do  what 
ought  to  be  done,  withoutgetting  up  anew  one  overall  the  rest. 

ffufFer  me  once  more  to  remind  you  that  you  w-ere  sent  to  the  Trustees.  Why  should 
J'on  mi-s  your  way?  I  am  not  a  Trustee,  (jo  then  to  the 'I'rustees  whither  you  were 
sent,  and  keep  to  the  resolutions  of  the  Quarterly  Conference.  Tfthe  Trustees  cannot, 
or  will  not,  sanction  your  wishes,  or  the  wishes  of  the  Conference,  you  are  welcome  to 
tell  them  of  the  wishes  of  the  people;  but  dont  take  upon  yourselves  to  supersede  then;, 
and  do  llieir  work  for  them,  whether  they  will  or  not. 

To  the  numerous  personalities  of  your  letter,  I  can  make  no  answer,  except,  perhaps, 
to  icferyouto  Jtt.  Cor.   iv.    1-5. 

I  am  brethren,  faithfnilv  vours, 

W".  CAPERS. 


CHARLESTON,  SEPT.  17,  1833. 
Rev.  Dr.  Capers — 

Dear  Krollier— Your  la.«t  letter  is  principally  taken  up  with  cndeavorin^r  to  prove  that 
we  have  (^omruilted  sundry  errors,  both  as  to  the  (jueslion  at  issue  and  the  couree  of  our 
own  conduct.  And  )st,  with  respect  to  the  fjuesiion.  You  say  your  remark  was  not 
intended  of  that  which  had  been  submitted  to  the  Quarterly  Conference,  simply  as  it 
then  stood,  whether  the  free  people  of  color  had  not  better  he  seated  where  the  boxes 
are  under  the  galleries,  hut  as  it  afterwards  beratne  embarrassed.  We  have  yet  to 
b'arn  how  ,  or  in  what  way,  the  question  has  since  become  embarrassed.  We  confess 
we  are.at  a  loss  to  conceive  of  the  existence  of  any  other  ((uestion,  than  whether  the 
i— ;i.!ii!if>:i-  sh.ill  l>f  '■.•irricd  into  effect,  or  not.     It  is  conceded,  we  believe,  that  the  Con- 


13 

ference  iias  the  riglit  to  pass  the  resolutions,  and  wo  know  ol'no  power — save  the  churcli 
in  its  corporate  capacity — that  can  set  aside  those  resohitions,  or  delay  the  carrying  of 
them  into  efiect. 

WHiat  voii  call  our  second  mistake  is,  with  regard  to  the  object  ofoiu"  appointment, 
and  the  duties  appropriated  to  us.  We  certainly  have  made  no  mistake  in  this  matter, 
as  we  never  for  a  mo'iient  imaj'ined,  as  you  suppose  we  did,  that  tre  should  et^'ect  the 
change  of  the  sittings.  VVeare  well  aware,  that  anv  change  appertaining  to  tlie  build- 
ings, is  appropriate  ^o  the  functions  of  the  I5oard  of  Trustees;  nor  have  you  even  attempt- 
ed to  prove  that  we  supposed  otherwise.  We  are  equally  welt  aware  of  the  duties  ap- 
propriate to  our  appointment;  and  have  yet  to  learn  that  we  have  assumed  the  perform- 
ance of  any  other;  and  bv  what  mode  of  reasoning  yon  have  arrived  at  the  conclusion, 
that  we  have  "made  the  duties  of  our  appointment  the  unauthorised  occasion  of  a  proce- 
dure, in  which  wc  have  superseded  the  resohitions  under  which  we  profess  to  act,  the 
Trustees,  and  all  known  regulations,  or  usages  of  church  order,"  we  are  uttcrlj  at  a  lo8S 
to  conceive. 

What  are  the  facts  of  the  case?  Simply  these.  The  day  subsequent  to  the  meeting  of 
the  Conference,  we  waited  on  vou,  as  the  rhairman  of  the  Hoard  of  Trustees,  and  re- 
quested you  to  call  a  meetii'g  of  that  body.  You  did  so,  but  in  conse(]uence  of  a  By  Law 
of  the  I^oard,  requiring  five  of  its  members  to  be  present  to  transact  business — (which 
Hy  Law  bv  the  way  was  long  since  abrogated  by  the  Ciuarterly  (Conference,  by  a  resolu- 
tion proposed  bv  yourself) — nothing  was  done.  The  subject  underwent  some  discussion 
bv  the  individuals  present,  when  it  was  most  broadly  intimated  that  some  few  of  the  co- 
lored members  should  be  consulted,  and  if  th(!v  approved  of  the  plan,  very  well;  if  not, 
nothing  ought  to  he  done.  Tliis  was  superseding  the  resolutions  of  the  Conference  to 
some  purpose.  As  those  who  were  present  however,  professed  to  be  unable  to  act  for 
want  of  a  (piorum,  the}'  separated  without  doing  anv  thing  in  the  premises.  But  be  it  re- 
membered, that  although  they  could  not  aj)propriatea  few  dollars  to  carry  into  ertect  tlie 
resolutions  of  the  Conference, /t»r  want  of  a  quoriitn,  they  could  find  a  way  to  attend 
to   the    re-pairing  of  Cundjerland  Church,  "7f/()r?/»f  (ir  ?/o  quorum." 

As  we  were  very  desirous  of  performing  the  duties  appertaining  to  our  appointment, 
we  addressed  a  letter  to  you  the  next  day,  reijuestiiig  that  another  meeting  of  the  Board 
might  he  called;  and  as  our  business  would  not  permit  us  to  throw  away  another  after- 
noon, (which  would  be  the  case  should  there  not  be  a  quorum)  we  enclosed  a  letter  ad- 
dressed to  the  Board,  containing  the  resolutions  of  the  Conference,  which  letter  we  re- 
(|uested  you  to  lay  before  them.  To  this  communication  you  gave  a  verbal  reply,  as 
follows'  "You  would  not  put  your  right  hand,  oryour  little  finger,  to  the  business  again, 
nor  would  you  call  a  meeting  of  the 'I'rustees."  .And  what  induced  this  most  strange 
determination?  Why  you  did  not  believe  that  the  (.'hurch  approved  of  the  resolution  of 
the  (Conference! 

Thus  far,  you  will  admit,  that  we  were  in  the  strict  line  of  our  duty.  But  now  comes 
the  sequel.  In  order  to  prove  to  you  that  the  church  did  approve  of  the  resolutions  of 
the  Conference,  and  thereby  induce  you  to  call  a  meeting  of  the  Trustees,  we  procured 
the  signatures  of  a  large  number  of  the  members,  to  a  paper  in  which  their  approval  is 
expressed.  At  this  you  took  offence.  .\nd  this  is  the  "head  and  front"  of  our  oflend- 
ing.  We  are  free  to  confess  that  this  act  was  not  required  of  us  by  the  Conference,  for 
it  was  not  possible  that  they  could  foresee  the  necessity  of  it;  but  we  do  maintain  that 
there  was  nothing  to  forbid  it. 

You  again  recur  to  the  question,  and  quote  from  our  letter  a  prediction  as  to  what 
"would  be  the  result  of  compelling  the  members,  contrary  to  tlieir  views  of  propriety,  to 
sit  beside  colored  persons  in  the  church.  On  this  you  remark,  that  there  are  lewd  wench- 
es who  obtrude  themselves  into  the  sittings  appropriated  to  the  ladies,  and  that  the  gen- 
tlemen will  not  interfere  to  rid  our  wives  and  daughters  of  this  most  scandalous  intrusion. 
V\'e  think  it  would  be  a  didiciilt  matter  to  discriniinate  between  the  "lewd  wenches," 
and  other  colored  persons:  of  this  we  are  certain,  that  it  is  next  to  impossible  to  prevent 
them  from  sitting  where  they  do,  unless  all  colored  persons  indiscriminately  are  preven- 
ted. Wiiether  there  is  "the  least  likelihood  that  any  difierent  arrangement  of  the  seats 
from  the  present  one  would  efiect  a  remedy  of  the  evil,"  or  not,  is  not  now  a  matter  for 
discussion.  The  Conference  believed  it  would,  and  made  provision  to  have  it  done,  and 
nothing  now  remains  but  that  it  be  done.  Whether  it  is  made  a  question,  or  not,  wheth- 
er the  whites  and  mulattoes  ought  to  sit  side  by  si.le  in  the  church,  dors  not  signify;  the 
fart  will  be  so  unless  the  proposed  alteration  is  erecterl. 


14 

Under  the  head  of ''another  misiake,"  you  mv. — 'I'lie  wording  of  ili.it  paper  (ilie 
one  signed  by  the  n)Ptnl>t'rs)  imports  that  the  Quarterly  Conference  had  ordered  the 
change  of  the  sittings,  and  appointed  us  to  execute  their  order.  Not  so.  The  wording 
of  the  paper  imports,  tliat  the  Ciuarierly  Confercjice  liad  ordered  the  chance,  l)ut  not  that 
we  were  appointed  to  execute  tlie  order.  It  imports,  that  if  the  'rru-stet-s  fail  to  do  it. 
they  (the  momliers)  astiie  supreme  power,  give  authority  to  have  it  done.  Shall  we  tell 
you  a  secret?  The  paper  was  so  worded,  because  we  had  good  reason  to  apprehend  that 
the  Trustees  would  not  execute  the  order,  and  because  you  had  said  the  Conference 
could  not  comjiel  their  obedience. 

The  list  mistake  you  notice,  is  our  accusing  you  of  interfering  to  prevent  the  lay  au- 
thorities of  the  church  from  acting;  and  you  say  you  have  done  nothing  to  prevent  the 
regular  action  of  the  lay  authorities.  Sufler  us  to  ask  a  question  or  two.  Can  the  Trus- 
tees act  without  a  meeting?  Is  it  not  the  province  of  the  Chairman  to  call  a  meeting  be- 
fore one  can  be  held?  Are  you  not  Chairman  of  the  Board?  When  these  question^  are 
answered,  it  will  soon  appear  whether  you  have  obstructed  the  regular  action  of  the  lay 
authorities  or  not. 

You  conclude,  by  reminding  us  that  we  were  sent  to  the  Trustees,  and  not  to  you. 
AVe  are  not  very  conversant  with  parliamentary  usages,  but  we  believe  the  onlv  proper 
way  to  address  a  Hoard,  is  through  their  chairman.  You  are  the  Chairman  of  the  Hoard 
of  Trustees;  we  therefore  addressed  you  in  the  first  insi.ance;  you  acknowledged  the  cor- 
rectness of  the  procedure,  l)y  calling  a  meeting  of  the  Hoard,  and  you  liave  also  kept  in 
your  possession  a  letter  addressed  to  them  by  us;  it  is  therefore  too  lato  to  say  that  we 
have  mis-sed  our  way. 

One  more  remark,  and  we  are  done.  Under  the  head  of  "the  object  of  our  appoint- 
ment," you  say  we  were  appointed  for  thj  purpose  of  formally  communicating  to  the 
Trustees  the  request,  not  the  order,  of  the  Conference.  It  is  doubtless  distinctly  in  your 
recollection,  that  the  original  resolution  before  the  Conference,  made  \\.  obligatory  on  the 
Trustees  to  carry  the  resolutions  into  effect.  You  suggested  to  the  mover,  (not  to  the 
Conference,  mark)  the  propriety  of  altering  the  phraseology,  so  as  to  make  it  a  request 
in  order  \o prevent  ilt-feclini^;  you  were  thou  told  that  the  language  was  designed,  but 
nevertheless,  in  deference  to  you,  the  alteration  was  made.  We  therefore  think  it  is  ta- 
king an  undue  advantage  of  the  circumstances,  to  lay  so  much  stress  upon  the  word  or- 
der. Bought  wit,  however,  says  the  old  adage,  is  best,  if  not  paid  too  dear  for;  and  the 
mover  of  the  resolutions  will  be  careful  for  the  future,  how  he  suffers  his  politesse  to  get 
the  better  of  his  judgment. 

We  arc,  reverend  and  dear  sir. 

Most  truly  yours, 

F.  D.  POYAS. 

JNO.  H.  HONOUR. 

WILLIAM  G.  MOOD. 

P.  S.  As  we  have  now  got  back  to  the  place  from  wlience  we  started,  (the  Trustees) 
we  hope  very  shortly,  to  have  an  answer  to  the  letter  addressed  to  them  some  two 
weelijj  ago;  and  then  for  the  "contingent"  duty. 


It  is  perceived  that  I  leff  the  lust  \\  ord,  and  u  lon^  one,  to  the  Conunitr- 
tce.  I  did  not  answer  th:;ir  hist  letter,  because  I  had  huiriicci  (hey  were 
jiot  in  a  temper  to  j)iofit  by  what  I  nii<.'ht  .sa}-.  Having  now  laid  the  whole 
correspondence  hft'ore  you,  however,  ]  ^\  ill  add  to  it  several  explanatioiis 
M'hich  1  hope  will  prove  sJilisfactory. 

1st.  To  their  strong  and  repeated  assi  rliows  that  they  htsii  imt  inistakcn 
or  exceeded  the  duties  assigned  them  by  the  Quarterly  Conference;  and 
that  the  paper  t<^>  which  ihiv  had  so  industriously  proctireo  subscribers  was 
not  a  superceduru  of  (he  authorities  of  (he  Church; -no  other  answer  is 
necessary  (ban  the  words  of  (he  paper  itself,  which  nuefiuivocally  atithor- 
isn  (he  (Jominitlee  to  do  ■\^■ll;lt  (be  Quarterly  Conl'-rciice  barle  them  reijuest 


15 

the  Trustees  to  do;  and  that,  iiidependenth"  of  any  other  authority  besides 
the  paper  itself. 

2.  My  reasons  for  dcchning  to  act  asiy  longer  as  Chairman  of  the 
Board  of  Trustees,  were  as  I  have  stated,  and  not  as  they  say.  I  did  in- 
deed express  a  doubt  whether  the  Church  generally  would  approve  of  the 
removal  of  the  boxes;  but  this  was  said  in  the  course  of  remarks  on  the 
inexpediency  of  the  measure,  and  not  as  a  reason  for  declining  to  act  as 
Chairman."^  3.  But  no  matter  for  what  cause  I  chose  to  decline  an  office 
which  no  one  will  pretend  I  was  bound  to  sustain,  how  came  it  to  pass  that 
I  should  be  accused  by  these  brethren,  of  prevetiting  the  lay  authorities  of 
the  Church  from  acting,  merely  because  I  would  not  act  as  Chairman 
twelve  days  after  I  had  told  them  explicitly  that  J  would  not?  The  Board 
was  as  competent  to  act  without  me  as  with  me.  4.  The  affirmation  that 
I  kept  a  letter  which  was  directed  to  the  Board  of  Trustees,  is  as  gratui- 
tous as  the  other  about  preventing  the  lay  authorities  of  the  Church  from 
acting.  The  letter  was  left  at  my  house,  and  remained  there  only  until  it 
was  convenient  for  me  to  deliver  it  to  one  of  the  Trustees.  5.  What  they 
say  respecting  the  Trustees  findiisg  a  way,  ''quorum  or  no  ([uorum,"  to  at- 
tend to  the  repairs  of  Cumberland  Church,  is  as  easily  set  aright.  The 
Trustees  passed  no  act  v  hatever  at  the  time  referred  to;  bul  it  being  men- 
tioned that  the  floor  of  the  Church  under  the  front  gallery  had  sunk  a  lit- 
tle, owing  to  the  decay  of  the  girder,  tliey  went  thither,  each  of  his  omh 
accord,  merely  to  examiiio  what  was  the  matter.  G.  The  Committee  pro- 
fessed not  to  know  how  the  quest io!i  about  the  removal  of  the  boxes  could 
be  embarrassed  after  the  Conference  passed  its  resolution.  Their  mean- 
ing plainly  is,  that  the  Quarterly  Conierence  having  once  passed  the  reso- 
lution, there  was  no  room  left  to  consider  any  thing  that  might  happen,  but 
right  or  wrong  it  nnist  be  carried  into  efTect.  Noav  (to  say  nothing  of  the 
province  of  the  Presiding  Elder,  or  the  Minister  in  Charge,  during  the  in- 
terval) if  the  resolution  of  the  Quarterly  Conference  was  thus  absolute  and 
illimitable,  why  did  not  the  Committee  who  held  it  to  be  so,  act  strictly 
and  exclusively  by  its  authority,  and  not  get  up  a  paper  to  empower  them 
to  do  what  the  Quarterly  Conference  had  requested  (not  ordered  as  thev 
say)  to  be  done?  And  why  did  they  not  respect  the  mandate  more  than  to 
seek  for  another  authority,  to  get  the  \^  ork  done  in  a  difllrent  May  from  that 
required  by  the  resolution  of  the  Quarterly  Conference?  If  the  resolution 
of  the  Quarterly  Conference  was  absolute  in  one  of  its  parts,  it  must  have 
been  equally  so  in  the  other;  and  if  the  removal  of  the  boxes  must  neces- 
sarily take  place  without  respect  to  circumstances,  because  a  resolution  of 
the  Quarterly  Conference  required  it,  then  ir  was  equally  necessary  that 
their  removal  be  effected  by  the  persons,  and  in  the  way,  proposed  by  the 
the  same  resolution,  of  that  same  Quarteily  Conference.  The  circum- 
stances of  the  case  which  influenced  our  conduct  with  respect  to  it,  were 
briefly  these.  The  resolution  for  removing  the  boxes  under  the  front  galle- 
ries and  placing  open  seats  in  their  stead,  for  the  use  of  free  people  of 
color  was  considered  in  the  Quarterly  Conference,  simply  in  view  of  the 
convenience  of  the  whites,  and  a  reasonable  accommodation  of  the  color- 

*It  will  be  seen  that  I  foresaw  the  evil  and  resigned  my  place  as  Chairman  ex  officio 
of  the  Board,  sometime  before  these  letters;  and  that  these  meVi  who  here  were  so  loth 
ta  let  me  do  s«,  have  since  accused  me  of  holding  to  the  office  from  a  love  of  power. 


IG 

0(1.  Nothing >vas  said  uf  any  iflect  likely  (o  he  produced  on  the  hlacks: 
and  unJortunatoly.  it  seems  not  to  have  occurred  to  any  hrothcr,  that  they 
might  he  injured  hy  if.  Hitherto,  the  free  colonid  peoplo  helongiag  to  the 
(-"hurch  have  genernlly  set  in  the  galleries.  The  resolution  ot"  the  Quar- 
terly Conference  proposed  not  to  exclude  them  thence,  or  it  Avould  have 
amounted  to  their  exclusion  from  tl'c  Church;  for  the  place  of  the  hoxcs 
could  not  hold  them,  and  if  they  could,  ihcy  vould  hardly  choose  to  expose 
themselves  to  the  scorn  of  the  hlacks,  hy  sitting  there.'  But  if  they  re- 
mained  in  the  galleries,  crowded  to  excess  as  they  now  arc  every  sabhath, 
what  should  become  of  (hose  who  now  fill  the  boxes?  Could  it  be  right 
to  deprive  all  these  of  seats  in  the  Church,  in  order  to  make  room  for  the 
very  tew  colored  j)eople  who  might  be  willing  to  sit  there  in  despite  of  the 
indignation  of  the  blacks?  lint  it  was  also  found  that  the  boxes  had  been 
erected,  (we  believe  at  the  itista!icc  of  Bishop  Asbnry)  for  the  humane  and 
charitable  purpose  of  affording  scats  to  the  decripit,  and  such  as  from  any 
infirmity  might  not  be  able  te  get  up  with  safety  into  the  galleries.  Of 
these,  there  are  a  number  in  the  membership  of  the  Church;  and  not  a  few 
who  for  many  years  have  worshipped  with  exemplary  piety  and  constancy. 
Ought  we  to  turn  away  the  most  needy  from  the  pastures  of  Christ?  Still 
farther,  an  earnest  remonstrance  was  brought  to  us  by  the  free  hlacks, 
Avho  complained  that  while  some  of  their  most  worthy  old  friends  would 
be  excluded  the  Church,  it  would  be  adopting  a  policy  in  the  Church  equal- 
ly unjust  and  oppressive  to  the  blacks,  aiul  inconsistent  with  our  civil  in- 
stitutions— the  law  of  the  land  making  no  such  distinction  between  black 
and  brown  people,  as  was  proposed  to  be  made.  All  these  things,  brethren, 
coming  to  our  knowledge  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Conference,  would 
it  have  become  us,  as  put  in  trust  v.ith  the  Gospel,  easily  to  acquiesce  in 
the  ■Avishes  of  the  Committfjc?  Could  we  do  less  than  remonstrate  against 
their  course  in  getting  a  pa])er  handed  about  from  member  to  member  (when 
you  were  not  yet  informed  of  the  difficulties  of  the  case)  with  so  manifest 
a  design  to  pull  for  a  powei-  to  do  their  own  will  at  all  hazards?  Or  could 
we  decline  to  rebuke  a  procedure  which  seemed  to  abuse  vour  confidence 
to  get  possession  of  a  rod  with  which  to  smite  and  break  asunder  the  bands 
of  the  Church? 

The  Committee,  agreeably  to  the  postscript  of  their  last  letter,  applied 
to  the  Board  of  Trustees;  and  the  following  extracts  of  the  minutes  of 
the  Board  will  sufHcicntlv  inform  vou  of  its  transactions. 


"At  a  meeting  of  the  Board  of  'iVustees  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  held  at  Trinity  Church,  Sept.  19,  188.3.  Present,  H.  Muckinfuss, 
Sam'l  Seyle,  S.  .1.  Wagner,  Geo.  Just,  (ieo.  Critzburg,  and  Abel  M'Kee." 

*^Reso1ved,  That  we  feel  willing  to  carry  the  resolutions  of  the  Quarterly 
Meeting  Conference  into  effect  as  directed,  but  state,  that  from  the  present 
embarrassment  in  regard  to  the  funds,  they  are  unable  to  have  the  altera, 
tions  made,  being  nearly  3000  dollars  in  debt  for  our  new  Parsonage,  and 
they  having  put  all  the  means  they  ])ossessed,  in  requisition  to  raise  funds, 
and  have  with  great  difficulty  been  able  to  pay  up  the  instalments  in  the 
Bank  as  they  became  due.  They  therefore  most  earnestly  request  the 
Quarterly  Meeting  Conference  to  suspend  the  j)roposed  alterations,  until 
the  Trustees  shall  be  in  funds  to  meet  the  ex])ense." 


17 


•*At  a  mkktixo  of  the  Board  ot*  Trustees  of  the  Mt;(hodist  Episcopal 
Clmrcli,  held  at  Trinity  Church,  Oct.  10,  1833,  present,  Henry  3Iuckin- 
fiiss,  Samuel  Seyle,  George  Just,  George  Chritzburg,  und  Abel  McKee. 

"Brother  Bass  stated  to  the  Board,  that  one  of  the  Committee  told  him 
that  they  had  made  collections,  in  order  to  have  the  alterations  executed, 
but  that  he  could  not  state  what  amount  had  been  collected.  The  Board 
of  Trustees,  after  consultation,  came  to  the  following  resolutions:  to  wit. 

Kesolred.  That  the  Board  believe,  tliat  the  proposed  alterations  will  tend 
rather  to  injure  than  promote  the  welfare  of  the  church.  They,  in  parti- 
cular, believe  that  the  fences  across  the  yard,  will  invite  lliose  who  may  be 
disposed  to  disturb  the  colored  people,  to  do  so,  as  the  fences  will  screen 
them  from  observation. — Also,  as  the  boxes  were  partly,  if  not  wholly 
hitcnded,  for  the  accommodation  of  the  infirm  and  lame  old  colored  peo- 
ple, who  were  not  able  to  get  up  stairs;  by  taking  the  boxes  from  them, 
they  will  be  driven  from  the  church,  or  compelled  to  stay  cut  of  doors. 
Therefore,  it  would  be  very  desirable  to  the  Trustees  to  have  the  subject 
reviewed  by  the  Quarterly  Meeting  Conference,  in  order  to  arrange  some 
plan,  that  might,  as  far  as  possible,  meet. the  views  and  approbation  of  all 
concerned. 

Resolved,  That  as  the  Board  of  Trustees  have  no  certain  inlormation  of 
the  amount  collected  by  the  committee,  whether  it  is  suflicient  or  not  to 
meet  the  expense  of  the  alterations,  they  think  it  most  prudent  not  to  com- 
mit the  church  or  themselves,  by  engaging  to  have  the  work  done,  and 
make  the  church  liable  for  the  deficiency,  should  there  be  any.  They 
think  it  best,  therefore,  not  to  interfere  with  the  committee's  arrangements. 

Resolved,  That  the  Trustees,  in  order  to  promote  the  peace  of  the 
church,  and  prevent  any  collision  or  misunderstanding  Avith  the  committee 
of  the  Quarterly  Conference,  Mill  not  put  any  obstacle  in  their  way,  should 
thev  think  proper  to  have  the  alterations  made;  and  that  they  may  be  noti- 
fied M'here  the  kevs  of  the  different  churches  may  be  had.  in  order  to  give 
them  readv  access." 


Agreeably  to  the  last  resolution  above,  the  committee  was  informed  that 
the  kevs  of  Cumberland  church  were  to  be  had  at  brother  Abel  McKee's, 
those  of  Trinity  at  the  old  house  in  the  church  yard,  and  those  of  Bethel 
at  the  Parsonage. 

After  this,  the  resolutions  of  the  Quarterly  Conference  was  suffered  to 
sleep.  But  how  is  it  to  be  accounted  for,  that  the  brethren  who  had  rais- 
ed  so  much  disturbance  about  those  resolutions — who  could  recognize  no 
power  in  the  functionaries  of  the  church,  no  matter  how  embarrassed, 
either  "to  set  them  aside,  or  delay  the  carrying  of  them  into  effect," — 
that  these  same  brethren,  the  moment  they  were  told  that  no  fiirther  oppo- 
sition would  he  made,  dropped  the  matter,  choosiiig  not  to  act?  We  avou- 
der  thev  were  not  afraid  of  incurring  a  share  of  the  sins  which  they  had 
so  unsparingly  charged  upon  others.  AVould  they  not  themselves  obey  the 
Quarterly  Conference?  And  above  all,  would  they  dare  to  set  aside  the 
(!xtra  authoritv  which  thev  had  so  laboriouslv  gathered  here  and  there,  bit 
bv  hit.  from  "IHE  SUPREME  POWER'''  What  were  reasons  worth 
3 


18 

\o  llieui,  which  they  had  rei'uscd  to  otliers?  Had  they  not  been  shakiugr 
heaven  and  earth  to  compel  their  brethren  to  rehnquish  their  reasons,  con- 
science, every  thinjr.  to  the  authority  of  an  ill-advised  request  of  the  Quar- 
terly Conference?  The  tnith  seems  to  be,  that  the  reasons  ngainst  the 
measure  had  become  generally  known,  and  commended  themselves  to 
every  one's  conscience.  Every  body  saw  that  the  resolution  had  been 
passed  prematurely,  and  ought  to  be  relii:(iui.shcd  for  some  other  arrange- 
ment. We  would  be  glad  to  believe  that,  by  some  means  or  other,  the 
brethren  of  the  committee  happened  not  to  learn,  till  just  at  the  time  ol" 
the  last  meeting  of  the  Trustees,  what  our  reasons  were.  If  such  was 
the  case,  it  is  fair  to  believe,  that  they  acted  from  a  sense  of  riglit;  but  it" 
not,  the  conclusion  seems  to  us  unavoidable,  that  thcv  watched  the  tide. 
At  any  rate,  "the  i)Oor,  and  the  maimed,  and  the  halt,  and  the  blind,"'  the 
most  miserable  and  the  most  rrcedy,  have  not  been  driven  from  the  house 
of  God;  and  ther.'  may  they  still  be  suffered  to  wait  on  .lesus,  and  enjoy 
his  grace. 

But  although  tiie  committee  chose  nr)t  to  remove  the  boxes,  the  chuich 
was  not  suiFered  to  repose  in  peace.  After  having  goaded  (intentionally  or 
not)  the  minister  in  charge,  into  a  withdrawal  of  himself  from  the  relation 
of  Chairman  to  the  Board,  which  long  custom,  approved  by  the  Board 
and  the  Quarterly  Conference,  had  appropriated  to  him;  and  after  having 
driven  the  Board  of  Trustees  to  leave  the  ground  clear  for  them,  to  do  as 
they  pleased  respecting  the  boxes,  we  still  were  stunned  with  the  noise  of 
increasing  agitation.  It  soon  became  apparent  that  the  committee  had 
not  been  alone.  The  uproar  waxed  loaded  and  louder  against  the  Trus- 
tees. They  were  said  to  have  assumed  a  mastery  of  the  church — to  have 
refused  obedience  to  a  positive  order  of  the  Quarterly  Conference — to  have 
disregarded  the  authority  of  the  Discipline; — that  the  church  property  was 
in  danger — that  the  Trustees  refusing  to  obey  the  Quarterly  Conference, 
must  have  laws  made  for  them  by  the  members  of  the  church,  which  they 
should  be  made  to  obey; — and  finally,  that  the  property  of  the  church  in 
the  city,  was  vested  in  the  corporation  of  the  church  as  a  unit,  without 
respect  to  our  connexion  with  others  under  the  authority  of  the  (leneral 
Conference — that  the  General  Conference  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  tem- 
poral affairs  of  the  churches — that  the  Trustees  ought  not  to  be,  and  must 
not  be,  elected  as  the  Discipline  directs,  and  held  responsible  to  the  Quar- 
terly  Conference;  but  they  must  be  elected  by  the  membership,  and  held 
responsible  to  them.  It  became  but  too  evident,  that  something  like  an 
organized  opposition  to  the  economy  of  the  church,  as  now  prescribed  in 
the  Discipline,  was  on  foot;  and  the  act  of  the  State  Legislature  of  1787, 
Avas  to  be  the  wedge  for  riving  asunder  the  institution  of  Methodism.  Still 
our  esteem  for  brethren  led  us  to  hope  the  evil  might  be  averted.  We 
appealed  to  the  Discipline,  but  they  planted  themselves  on  the  act  of  Incor- 
poration— We  told  them  it  was  very  doubtful  whether  the  church  could 
now  claim  to  be  a  corporation  by  authority  of  that  act;  but  they  replied, 
we  knew  nothing  about  it — were  not  conversant  with  such  things.  We 
urged,  that  if  the  act  of  Incorporation  was  valid,  which  we  believed  not, 
it  did  not  oblige  them  to  infringe  the  Discipline, — that  the  act  could  not 
have  been  intended  to  put  the  economy  of  the  church  under  legislative  con- 
trol, as  if  it  prescribed  a  constitution  for  the  church  in  giving  it  a  charter; 
— that  what  the  Legislature  had  granted  w  ere  cit*il  and  not  ecclesiastical 


1-9 

^>i'ivileges,  and  tor  civil  and  not  ecclesiaslical  uses.  But  vhetlier  our 
brethi'cn  could  answer  us,  or  not,  wc  could  prevail  nothiRg  with^^tliem. 
They  held  that  it  was  their  right — the  people  were  the  supreme  power: 
(meaning  that  the  nienibcrs  oi'  a  particular  society  were  supreme  over  tho 
General  Conference,  and  all  the  established  rules  of  our  discipline.)  And 
for  all  this,  the  Trust<ies  were  made  chargeable.  They  were  accused, 
over  and  over  again,  of  holding  themselves  irresi)onsiblc  to  the  Quarterly 
(Conference;  and  of  carrying  themselves  like  masters,  rather  than  servants, 
of  the  church.  No  explanations  could  avail  any  thiug.  They  were  in- 
deed, good  as  men,  but  as  Trustees,  their  condemnation  was  utter,  and  in'e- 
vt^rsible. 

A  few  da3's  after  this  date,  the  following  paper  was  banded  me  by  the 
eommittee  mentioned  in  it: 

At  a  meeting  of  nials  mcnibcis  of  tliR  iMelhodist  Kpiscopal  Churcli,  held  in  Trinity 
School  llooni,  on  Tuesday  evening,  October  29tli,  1833,  John  Kingman  was  called  to 
the  chair,  and  V.  A.  DecUtnan  appointed  Secretary. 

The  following  resolution  was  adopted: 

"Wherkas  the  temporal  alliiirs  of  the  Church  in  tliis  citv,  are  in  such  a  state  as  to 
require  the  immediate  action  of  the  membership — therefore  licsolvctl.  That  a  Commit- 
tee be  appointed  with  instructions  to  procure  a  meeting  of  the  Church  in  its  Corporate 
capacity;  and  that  they  take  such  measures  as  will  be  elliiclual  m  attaining  this  object,  in 
order  that  the  Church  may  consider  the  propriety  of  adopting  such  measures  with  regard 
to  temporalities,  as  may  to  them  appear  most  expedient." 

Whereupon,  the  Chairman  appointed  the  following  pereons  as  the  Committee — viz: 
Wm.  Laval,  Wm.  Kirkwood,  and  Oliver  B.  Hillard. 

Tiie  meeting  then  adjourned.         livtract  from  the  Minutes, 

r.  A.  BECK.^IAN,  Stcrctary. 

0/1  coaferriiig  with  brother  IJass,  our  Presiding  Elder,  and  the  brethren 
associated  with  me  as  pastors  oi  the  church,  v.e  thought  it  best  to  call  a 
meeting  of  the  male  membi;rs  of  the  church.  Our  reasons  for  this  were, 
that  although  our  eflbrts  had  been  unavailing  with  the  leading  memberss 
concerned,  yet  a  free  conversation  in  presence  of  the  v  hole  membership, 
might  prove  beneficial  to  many,  if  not  to  all  the  complainers.  And  be- 
cause the  allegations  against  the  Board  of  Trustees,  which  were  easily 
answered,  and  which,  as  far  as  we  had  been  permitted  to  hear,  formed  the 
ground  of  their  rctmplaints,  ought  to  be  answered  in  justice  to  the  Board. 
Accoruiogly,  at  the  close  of  the  society  meeting  on  the  5th  inst.  we  called 
a  meeting  of  the  ni;de  menibors  of  the  church,  stating  at  the  time,  that  it 
was  in  con.seqtijnce  of  an  application  from  a  number  of  brethren,  who  pro- 
fessed to  consider  it  necessary  to  the  temporal  interests  of  the  church.  I 
slightly  alluded  in  general  terms  to  the  disturbances  among  us;  and  con. 
eluded  with  requesting  all  to  attend,  in  hope,  that  after  conversing  together 
as  brethren  of  the  same  house,  we  might  better  understand  each  other,  and 
t;ome  to  some  satisfactory  adjustment  of  ditferences  among  us.  The  meet- 
i:!<:^  Miis  fixed  for  'J'uesday  evening,  the  I'ith  inst.  in  Trinitv  church.  At 
the  time,  brother  Bass,  us  Presiding  Elder,  took  the  chair,  and  opened  the 
meetiiig  with  singiiig  and  prayer.  It  was  suggested  to  appoint  a  Secre- 
tary, and  a  nomination  wiis  made  of  a  brother  to  take  the  place;  when 
one  of  the  members  rose,  and  earnesfly  insisted  the  Presiding  Elder  had  no 
right  to  tlic  chair,  and  should  not  act  as  the  presiding  olTicer,  unless  appuii;-, 
ted  by  the   meeting.     This  member  urged  that  it  was  n  mectin'g  ol'  tht". 


20 

rliurtli  iii  its  fornorafc  capacity;  a:ul  as  bucli,  whatovor  niiglit  he  tlic  usa- 
ges ol"  tli<!  church,  the  ineetiug  v.ouUl  acknoukdge  uo  chairiiian  not  of  its 
nwu  appointing.  It  Mas  replied,  that  the  meeting  had  not  hei  ii  called  as 
a  corporation  nr^cting.  or  in  the  name  of  the  corporation,  but  simply  as  a 
meeting  ot'the  m;tle  mrmhers  of  age,  of  the  church.  The  Presiding  Elder 
had  au  undoubted  right  to  the  chair  in  ajiy  such  meeting  in  his  district;  or 
if  any  other  person  could  be  considered  under  the  Discipline  as  entitled  to 
it,  it  must  bo  the  minister  ia  charge,  who  disclaimed  it.  While  such  re- 
marks as  these  were  bciiig  uttered,  he  who  h;id  first  objected,  rose  hastily, 
and  said  the  meetir.g  was  not  organized,  and  any  member  had  a  right  to 
act  so  far  as  to  take  the  vote  for  a  chairman,  he  accordingly  put  it  to  vote 
whether  brother  Bass  should  act  as  chairman,  or  not.  It  was  urged,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  brethren,  by  such  a  course  of  procedure,  otlended  our  con- 
sciences. We  had  not  colled  a  meeting  of  the  corpontion,  for  we  doubted 
whether  there  was  any  corporation.  But  the  (lucstion  of  corporation 
aside,  we  could  rot,  consistently  with  our  vows  to  maintain  the  order  and 
disciplino  of  the  church,  make  ourselves  members  of  a  meeting,  which,  of 
its  own  assumption,  should  deiiy  to  the  Presiding  Elder  >the  right  of  his 
office.  If  they  might  do  this  with  respect  to  the  chair,  might  they  not 
also  do  the  same  thing  v%ith  respect  to  the  pulpit?  Did  he  hold  either  the 
one,  or  the  other,  from  (hem?  The  Presiding  Elder  disclaimed  holding  the 
chair  by  their  appoiistmont,  and  brethren  were  urged  not  to  force  us  to  the 
necessity  of  either  disniis>i!ig  the  meeting,  or  continuing  in  it  against  our 
consciences.  They  hdd  it  as  a  question  oi'  form,  whereas  it  was  one  of 
conscience  with  us.  It  would  be  an  act  of  "disobedience  to  the  order  and 
discipline  of  the  church,"  which  we  had  most  solemnly  promised  to  obey, 
were  we  to  identify  ourselvc  s  with  such  proceedings.  It  was  proposed  to 
take  the  sense  of  the  members  presci-t,  whether  they  would  persist  iu 
affirming,  that  brother  Bass  was  the  chairman  of  the  meeting  by  the  vote 
that  had  been  so  strange  ly  put,  or  would  acknowledge  him  such  by  virtue 
of  his  office.  A  majority  iiisisted  \w.  irhuuld  be  coiisidered  chairman  only 
by  the  vote.  He  then,  at  my  request  that  he  would  dismiss  the  meeting, 
prayed,  and  pronounced  the  benediction,  and  (he  meeting  being  thus  dis- 
missed, we  retired.  As  we  were  leaving  the  house,  I  requested  all  who 
were  willing  to  abide  by  the  Discipline,  to  accompany  us,  and  added  a  few 
admonitory  words.  This  was  answered  by  one  o{'  the  brethren,  (the  same 
who  had  been  so  prominent  in  the  oppositioh)  who  called  on  all  those  who 
were  not  disposed  to  be  governed  by  the  dictum  of  an  individual,  to  re. 
main. 

U'i  h'ive  been  furnished  with  a  copy  of  the  proceedings  of  the  very- 
extraordinary  meeting,  -which  was  held  by  those  members  m  lio  thought 
proper  to  remain  for  such  a  purpose.  Our  copy  is  autheiificaliy  sigiied  by 
the  individuals  who  acteJ  as  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  meeting.  It 
is  as  folU>ws: 


Al  u  s))(.cial  meeting  of  the  membeis  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  ortliarlos- 
toii,  So.  Ca.  ill  their  Corporate  capacity,  held  in  Trinity  Church  in  Charleston,  on  'I'ues- 
ilay  evening,  the  12th  Nov.  1833: 

Hrother  .lohii  II.  Honour  was  nominated,  and  took  the  chair,  and  brother  W.  W. 
•  ixHirev  fhfTjen  as  Secretary. 


21 

Tlie  mcetini;  was  lliPii  called  to  order,  and  on  molioii  of  brotlier  Johu  Kingnian,  it 
was  resolved,  that  the  Chairman  read,  for  the  information  of  the  meeting,  the  act  of  in- 
corporation of  divers  roli:;ions  societies  therein  named,  passed  27th  ?»lavc!i,  1787,  and 
the  act  to  which  that  refers^  passed  26th  .Alarch,  17S4;  which  was  according!)-  done. 

On  motion  of  brotlier  John  Kingman,  it  was  then  resolved,  that  the  Chairman  read, 
for  the  information  of  tin;  meeting,  and  for  their  adoption,  the  following  preamble  and 
rules;  whicli  was  accordingly  done. 

Preamblk. — Whereas,  by  the  3d  clause  of  the  act  of  the  Legislature,  passed  27tb 
IMarch,  17S7,  incorporating  the  .Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  the  city  of  Charleston,  it 
is  declared,  that  it  shall  have  perpetual  succes.sion  of  olliccrs  and  members,  and  a  common 
seal,  with  power  to  change,  alter,  break  and  make  anew  the  same,  as  often  as  they  the 
said  corporation  shall  judge  expedient.  .And  whereas  in  the  same  acta  reference  is  made 
to  an  act  pa.ssed  2Cth  IMarch,  1784,  entitled  "An  Act  incorporating  divers  religious  socie- 
ties therein  named,"  vesting  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal  ("hurch,  &c.  all  the  powers, 
privileges  and  advantages  which  are  specified  and  expressed  in  the  same;  and,  among 
other  things,  it  is  declared  (as  by  reference  to  said  act  will  more  fully  appear,)  that  the 
societies  severally  shall  "be  able  and  capable  in  law,  to  purchase,  have,  bold,  receive, 
enjoy,  possess  and  retain  to  them  severally,  and  to  their  successors  in  perpetuity,  or  for 
any  term  of  years,  any  estate  or  estates,  lands,  tenements  or  hereditaments  of  what  kind 
or  nature  soever;  and  to  sell,  alien,  exchange,  demise  or  lease  the  same,  or  any  pait 
thereof,  as  they  shall  think  proper,  &c. — and  to  7iinke  xiich  rztlesand  by-laws,  (not  re- 
pugnant or  contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  land,)  for  the  benefit  and  advantage  of  the  said 
corporation,  and  for  the  order,  rule,  good  government  and  management  of  the  corpora- 
tion; and  to  appoint  and  choose,  di.--place,  remove  and  supply  such  ollicers,  &c.  to  be  em- 
ployed in  the  alfairs  of  the  corporation,  as  they  shall  from  time  to  time  appiove  of  and 
think  fit.  .And  whereas  the  corporation,  for  divers  good  reasons,  deem  it  expedient  and 
proper  at  this  time  to  alter  and  amend  the  mode  and  manner  of  electing  their  officers, 
and  to  define  more  particularlv  the  duties  and  responsibilities  of  the  said  officers,  declare 
the  following  Rules  and  Bv-Laws  shall  be  the  rule  of  government  for  the  Methodist 
I'piscopal  Church  in  the  city  of  Charleston,  in  the  matters  particularly  set  forth  in  them; 
and  that  they  he  considered  as  repealing  all  former  rules,  usages,  and  modes  of  naanage- 
nient  in  the  said  Church,  which  may  be  repugnant  to  those  now  adopted,  viz: 

ARTICLE  L — There  sh;ill  be  an  annual  meeting  of  the  Church  in  its  Corporate  capa- 
city, on  the  third  Tuesday  in  November;  at  which  time,  a  Board  of  Trustees,  nine  in 
number,  shall  be  elected  by  a  majority  of  the  members  present,  to  serve  until  the  next 
annual  meeting;  the  same  persons  being  re-eligible  to  office. 

ART.  IL — Scrtini}  1.  On  the  first  Monday  subsequent  to  the  annual  meeting  of  the 
Corporation,  the  Board  of  Trustees  shall  meet  and  elect  from  among  themselves  a  Chair- 
man, Secretary  and  Treasurer. 

Sec.  2.  The  duty  of  the  Chairman  shall  be,  to  preside  at  all  meetings  of  the  Board, 
and  preserve  order  and  decorum.  To  call  extra  meetings  of  the  Board  whenever  he 
deems  it  necessary,  or  whenever  required  so  to  do  by  any  twenty  members  of  the  Church, 
expressed  in  writing. 

Sec.  3.  The  duty  of  the  Secretary  shall  be,  to  summon  the  Trustees  by  billet  to  the 
several  meetings  of  the  Board  called  by  the  Chairman.  To  attend  all  such  meetings  in 
person,  and  keep  a  journal  of  its  proceedings.  To  enter  in  a  book  the  act  of  the  Legis- 
lature incorporating  the  Church,  and  a  prior  act  to  which  reference  is  made,  defining  the 
powers  of  tlie  Church.  To  submit,  when  required,  the  books  and  journals  of  the  church 
to  the  inspection  of  the  Board  of  Trustees,  or  any  committee  appointed  to  inspect  them 
by  the  Church.  He  shall  transmit  and  communicate  any  proceedings,  order  or  resolve 
of  the  Church  or  Board  of  Trustees,  that  may  be  required  of  him  by  the  Presiding 
Officer. 

Sec.  4.  The  Treasurer  shall  be  responsible  to  the  Church  for  all  the  funds,  papers, 
books  and  cflects  of  the  Church  entrusted  to  bis  care,  unless  he  can  satisfactorily  account 
to  the  Board  of  Trustees,  that  the  injury  or  loss  of  the  above  property  was  unavoidable. 
He  shall  not  expend  or  appropriate  the  funds  to  any  purpose  whatever,  unless  on  the  au- 
thority of  a  written  order,  signed  by  the  (.'liairman,  and  countersigned  by  the  Secretary, 
specifying  the  purpose  of  appropriation.  He  shall  keep  a  regular  account  of  monies  re- 
roived  and  expended.  He  shall,  at  every  meeting  of  the  Church,  exhibit  a  correct  state- 
ment of  the  funds.  His  books,  papers  and  vouchers  shall  be  subject  to  the  inspection  of 
the  Board  of  Trustees,  or  a  Commiitee  appointed  by  the  Church  to  inspect  them.     He 


22 

sliall,  on  pnteiing  upon  tlic  dulios  of  liis  oflice,  gi\c  a  receipt  to  the  C'liairnian  for  al' 
hooks,  papers,  luonie*  ;ind  property  belonging  to  tlie  Church  and  entrusted  to  his  care: 
and  in  the  event  of  its  becoming  necessary  al  any  lime  to  borrow  money  for  tlie  use  of 
the  Church,  he  sliall  »iign  the  necessary  papers  in  tlie  name  of  the  Treasurer  of  llie  Metli- 
odist  Episcopal  Chiireh  of  Charleston,  after  being  duly  authorized  so  to  do. 

ART.  III. — The  Hoard  of  Trustees  shall  meet  at  least  once  a  month,  to  examine  and 
transact  the  business  of  the  (."hurcli.  Five  'JVustees  shall  form  a  (|uorMm  to  do  business. 
Should  any  vacancy  occur  by  death,  resignation  or  otherwise,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
Board  to  appoint  a  member  of  the  Church  to  fill  the  same  until  the  vacancy  be  supjilied 
at  the  ensuing  annual  election.  They  shall  appoint  committees  for  the  purpose  of  exam- 
ining the  Treasurer's  accounts.  Secretary's  books,  and  state  of  the  Churches,  Parsonages, 
&c.  and  receive  their  reports.  They  shall  keep  the  Churches,  Parsonages  and  Mouses 
belonging  to  the  Church  in  repair,  and  receive  all  rents,  fi-cs  of  interments,  &c.  They 
shall  elect  two  Sextons,  one  for  Trinity  and  one  for  Hethel,  who  shall  account  to  the 
Board  for  all  monies  that  may  come  into  their  hands  for  interments.  They  shall  fix  the 
amount  necessary  to  be  paid  by  strangers  for  interment  in  our  burial-grounds,  together 
with  the  Sexton's  fees,  provided  the  members  of  the  Church  be  not  compelled  to  pay 
more  than  fi\e  dollars  for  each  interment,  including  every  expense.  They  shall  have 
power  to  make  by-laws  for  their  own  government,  provided  such  by-laws  are  in  accord- 
ance with,  or  do  not  infringe  on  these  rules.  iS'o  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  oft'ice  of 
a  Trustee,  unless  he  has  been,  at  least,  one  year  a  regular  member  of  the  Church,  and  of 
the  age  of  twenty-one  ye.irs.  At  each  annual  meeting  of  the  Church,  they  shall  exhi- 
bit a  correct  statement  of  all  their  arts  during  the  preceding  year. 

ART.  IV. — .\n  Executive  Committee  of  twenty-five,  taken  from  among  the  members 
not  Trustees,  shall  be  annually  elected,  with  authority,  conjointly  with  the  Board  of 
Trustees,  to  act  for  the  Church  during  the  recess.  They  shall  have  authority,  (or  a  ma- 
jority of  them)  to  authorise  the  purchase  or  sale  of  any  property,  (the  chapels  e.xcepted,) 
as  they  shall  judge  most  expedient.  The  Executive  Committee  shall  be  empowered  to 
call  extra  meetings  of  the  Corporation,  whenever  in  their  judgment,  it  shall  be  necessary 
to  do  so.     .-Xt  each  annual  meeting  they  shall  report  their  doings. 

ART.  V. — The  Book  of  Discipline,  as  altered  and  amended  from  time  to4ime,  by 
the  General  Conference  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  shall  be  the  rule  and  gov- 
erning principle  in  all  cases  not  particularly  defined  in  these  rules. 

ART.  VI. — No  alteration  or  amendment  shall  be  made  to  these  rules  without  the  con- 
currence of  a  majority  of  the  members  assembled  at  an  annual  meeting;  and  not  then, 
unless  three  months'  public  notice  of  such  alteration  has  been  previously  given. 


On  motion  of  brother  Wm.  Laval,  it  was  then  resolved,  that  the  above  preamble  and 
rules  be  put  separately  and  distinctly  to  the  vote  of  the  meeting;  which  was  accordingly 
done,  and  the  said  preamble  and  rules  unanimously  adopted. 

On  motion  of  brother  John  Kingman,  it  was  further  resolved,  that  the  meeting  go  into 
an  election  for  nine  Trustees;  which  was  accordingly  done,  and  the  following  persons 
duly  elected,  viz.  Eliab  Kingman,  Henry  ISIuckinfuss,  Charles  Prince,  Samuel  Seyle, 
Abel  RI'Kee,  Samuel  J.  Wagner,  George  Just,  George  Chritzburg,  and  John  M.  lloff. 

On  motion  of  Brother  VVm.  Laval,  the  following  resolution  was  then  adopted: 

Resolved,  That  in  case  the  Trustees  {elect)  fail  to  meet  and  organize  according  to 
the  foregoing  rules,  within  fifteen  days  from  the  time  of  their  election,  such  failure^shall 
be  considered  a  refusal  to  serve. 

On  motion,  further  resolved,  that  the  Secretary  of  this  meeting  be  instructed,  and  he 
is  hereby  authorised  to  serve  the  above  named  Trustees  with  a  notice  of  their  election, 
and  notify  them  to  meet  at  a  particular  time  and  place,  and  lay  before  them  a  copy  of 
the  above  rules,  and  ascertain  whether  or  not  they  will  serve,  and  report  at  an  adjourned 
meeting. 

On  motion,  resolved,  that  the  Secretary  furnish  the  Presiding  Elder,  and  the  .Alinisler 
in  Charge  on  the  station,  with  a  copy  of  the  proceedings  of  this  meeting. 

On  motion,  resolved,  that  this  meeting  be  adjourned  to  the  first  .Mondav  in  December 
next,  at  half-past  six  o'clock,  1'.  M.  at  Trinity  Church. 

The  meeting  was  then  closed  with  jirayer  bv  Rev.  V.  D.  Povas. 

J.  If.  liOMUR.  Chninnan. 

\\.  W.  (^lOUFREY,  f^ecretnrif. 


.23 

The  cliaracter  of  the  above  proceedings  is  too  clearly  marked  to  require 
definition.  When  in  conversation  with  brethren,  leading  members  of  the 
meeting,  we  had  objected  to  the  rights  they  claimed,  (supposing  the  pre- 
text of  incorporation  as  now  set  up  were  valid)  we  mainly  urged  the  in- 
compatibility of  such  claims  wiih  the  Discipline  of  the  Church.  To  this, 
we  received  for  answer,  that  they  had  no  design  or  desire  to  infringe  on 
the  discipline,  but  were  covered  fully  by  its  provisions.  The  words  inclu- 
ded  in  a  parenthesis,  on  page  167  of  the  edition  of  1832,  sixteen  lines  from 
the  top,  were  alledgcd  to  be  ample  authority  for  all  they  intended  to  do. — 
That  is  to  say:  the  parenthetical  exception  t'ound  in  the  sentence  which 
points  out  the  way  to  create  a  new  Board  of  Trustees,  was  maintained  to 
authorise,  without  limit,  the  controlling  of  an  old  Board,  changing  its  re- 
sponsibility, and  vacating  it  at  pleasure.  But  how?  Wliy,  the  exception 
provided,  that  a  new  Board  of  Trustees  might  be  created  in  some  other 
wa},  than  by  the  appointment  of  the  Preacher  in  (,'harg<%  or  the  Presiding 
I'Mder, — in  those  states  and  territories  where  the  statutes  rcfjuirod  it.  But 
what  of  that?  Was  there  any  statute  in  this  State  providing  the  manner 
in  which  churches  must  appoint  Trustees?  There  confessedly  was  not; 
but  brethren  maintained  that  the  act  of  incorporation,  by  authorising  the 
body  corporate  to  appoint  its  oilicers.  had  the  same  force  as  a  statute  which 
should  provide  some  specific  mode  for  creating  a  Board  of  Trustees. — 
Admitting  this  to  be  so  in  the  case  of  the  first  formation  of  a  Board  of 
Trustees,  (and  we  have  no  evidence  that  the  j.hmsoiis  iu>t  apj)ointed  Trus- 
tees  in  this  city,  were  not  appointed  by  the  then  acknowledged  corpora- 
tion,  orthat  the  mode  of  perpetuating  the  Trusteeship,  as  fixed  in  the  Dis- 
cipline  published  in  1792.  and  afterwards  to  the  present  time,  was  not  ap- 
proved by  the  corporation)  still,  there  appears  no  shadow  of  reason  for 
applying  the  exception  which  the  Discipline  appropriates  to  the  particular 
case  of  forming  anew  Board  of  Trustees,  to  the  cases  for  which  it  is  now 
claimed.  Does  the  Discipline  make  any  such  exception  in  fixing  the  re- 
sponsihiliii/  oC  a  Board  of  Trustees?  Or  in  providing  for  the  perpetuity  of  a 
lioard?  None  whatever;  and  for  this  good  reason,  that  none  was  wanted. 
But  brethren  seemed  immovable  in  the  position,  that  the  exception  above 
mentioned,  would  authorise  whatever  they  might  choose  concerning  Trus- 
tees. If  Ave  held  them  to  the  grammatical  construction  of  the  sentence. 
why  to  be  sure,  they  understood  grammar,  but  not  as  it  is  shaped  in  the 
present  case.  They  were  bent  on  their  right  of  carrying  the  little  paren- 
thesis, a  few  lines,  or  a  few  pages  .out  of  its  place  at  all  events.  The  Dis. 
cipline  was  no  better  at  page  163,  ten  lines  from  the  bottom,  than  at  page 
167,  fifteen  lines  from  the  top,  nor  better  at  the  7th  line  of  page  167,  than 
at  the  fifteenth  line  of  the  same  page.  Certainly  no  better,  we  admitted, 
but  the  wide  difference  between  the  cases,  was  this,  that  the  authority  which 
framed  -the  Discipline,  framed  its  pages,  and  parts  of  pages,  good  or  bad, 
as  they  now  are,  and  not  as  brethren  choose  to  alter  them.  If  the  General 
Conference  had  said  any  where  in  the  book,  that  the  words  on  page  167 
"except  in  those  States  and  Territories  where  the  statutes  provide  difler- 
ently" — should  apply  to  other  cases,  (as  to  a  succession  of  Trustees,  or 
the  fixing  of  th;  irresponsibility)  then  the  authority  would  have  been  as 
good  for  those  other  cases,  as  for  the  one  specified  case.  This  however, 
the  General  Conference  had  not  thought  proper  to  do,  and  therefore  the 
brethren  who  seemed  so  bent  on  the  measure,  could  not  do  it.     Suppose 


24 

they  could  transfer  the  parenthesis  in  question,  from  the  case  to  uliith  ex- 
clusivelylhe  discipline  afiixes  it,  might  they  not,  for  the  same  reason,    ap- 
ply it  to  pajrc  IG^,  and  so  take  to  themselves  (lie  appoinfnient  of  Sle^vunls.' 
Or  to  page  "Jo,  and  fake  npoM  them  the  appointment  ol'  the    Freachers.'     If 
their  rightof  appointing!  lie  Trustees,  and    ooutrolling  their    responsibilitx . 
and  succession,  contrary  to  the  Discipline,  be  admitted,  it   rmounts   to    an 
admission  of  a  right  in  tliem  to  appoint  all  other  otKcors  of  (he  church, and 
control  them  at  |)lca3ure.     'I'his  consccpiencc  they   never  pretended  to  de- 
ny,  but  \vhcn  driven  to  it.  they  only    said  they  would   never   exercise   the 
right  of  interfering  >vilh  (he  ai)poi;itm(iit  of  those    oJFicers  of  the   church 
who  arc  appointed  lor  spiritual  purpost  s.     Thus,  then,  they   had   assumed 
a  right,  which,  IxJili  gave  them  the  appoinlmei't  and  control  of  all  the   offi- 
cers of  the  church,  \vheth('r  meivilxTs  or  nnnisters,   and    virfu.dly   merged 
in  their  will  all  the  authority  ofail  the  bodies  belonging  to  the  church,  from 
the  General  Conference  down  to  a  Leader's  meeting.     And   all    this   thev 
required  us  to  yield  to  them  upon  the  sole  pledge   of  our   confidence,  that 
they  would  do  nothing,  which  as  31ethodists,  they  ought  not    to  do.     They 
claimed  to  love  the  Discipline  no  less  than  we,   and    to   be    every    whit  as 
hearty  Methodists  as  any  others.     But  what  have  they  now  actually  done? 
Let  us  examine  the  5th  article  of  their  Rules  and  By-laws,  as  a    specimen. 
It  reads  thus: — "The  Book  of  Discipline,  as  altered  and  amended  from  time 
to  time  by  the  (Tcneral   Conference  of  the   .Methodist  Episcopal    Church, 
shall  be  the  rule  and  governing  principle  in  all  cases  not  particularly  defin- 
ed in  these  Rules."     Now  if  tliese  brethren  held  no  independence    of  the 
Book  of  Discipline,  or  claimed  no  power  superior  to  it?     Why  needed  thev 
to  adopt  it/  If  they  held  a  right  to  ordain  that  the  Book  of  Discipline  shall  be 
the  rule    and  governing    principle  of  the    Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in 
Charleston,  they  must  have  held  an  equal  right  to  ordain  that  it  should  jiot 
be.     In  cither  ease,  the  axithorily  of  the  Booh  of  Discipline  is  made  to  depend 
on  THE  WILL  or  THE  :>ii;ETix»i.    But  why  are  "all  cases  not  particularly  defin. 
ed  by  these  Rides,"  alone  subjected  to  the  authority  of  the  Book  of  Discipline? 
Why  not   all  cases  ichatsocvei;  w  Inch    are    cognizable    by  the   Discipline, 
whether  dctincd  or  not  defined  in  (he  Rules?  This  question  can  be  answered 
in  one  of  two  ways  oidy,  and  either  one   equally  goes  against  the  authority 
of  the   Discipline.     Either,    1st,  the  cases    particularly  defined   in  these 
rules,  are  so  defined  in  known  contradiction  to  the   Disci|)line,  and  the  two, 
being  opposite,    cannot  govern  together,   and  so    the  less,   wdiich   is  the 
Book  of  Discipline,  must  be  subjected  to  the  greater,  which  is  the  Rule; — 
Or  2nd,  though  they  agree,  as  to  the  p7irpo7-t  of  the  thing  to  be  done,  yet,  as 
the  authority,  or  "governing principle^'  for  doing  it,  must  derive  from  one  or 
the  other,  tlie  Book  or  the  Rule,  and  not  from  both,  each  distinctively  claim- 
ing the  authority  to  govern,  the  Book  of  Discipline  must  still    succumb  to 
the  Rule,  as  to  the  greater  of  the  two.     Now  the  Book  of  Discipline   is  our 
system  of  church  laws.     Its  whole  importance  to    the  clnnrh    is  identified 
with  its  authority  to  govern;  "the  governing    principle,"  being  that    whicli 
consthutes  the  identity  of  law,  Avithout  which  nothing  can    be    law.     This 
being  so,  it  follows,  that  whatever  divests  the  Discipline  of  its  "governing 
principle,"  destroys  it  as  Discipline  to  tliat   same  extent,  and  necessarily  is 
against  it.     We  conclude  therefore,  that  the  Rule  which  should    supersede 
"the  governing  principle"  of  the  Discipline,  though  it  could  agree  with  it  in 
every  other  respect,  is  a  rule  against  the  Discipline.     It  makes  that  a  dead 


^25 

letter,  a  nullity,  which  before  was  an  authoritative  word.  It  ©usts  thd 
Discipline,  and  gets  into  its  place.  The  Discipline  cannot  be  at  home,  if 
such  a  rule  keeps  the  house.  And  which  of  these  authorities  ought  we  to 
acknowledge? 

Our  reasoning  in  the  above,  is  borne  out  by  the  whole  scope  of  the  pro- 
(•eedings  of  this  ever  to  be  regretted  meeting.  They  vacated  the  offices 
oi'  the  Board  of  Trustees,  to  which  its  members  iiad  been  regularly  appoin- 
ted, as  the  Discipline,  in  the  following  words,  directs:  ''And  in  further 
trust  and  confidence,  that  as  often  as  any  one  or  more  of  the  Trustees  herein 
before  mentioned  shall  die,  or  cease  to  be  a  member  or  members  of  the  said 
church,  according  to  the  rules  and  discipline  as  aforesaid,  then  and  in  such 
case,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  stationed  minister  or  preacher,  (authorised 
as  aforesaid)  who  shall  have  the  pastoral  charge  of  the  members  of  the  said 
church,  to  call  a  meeting  of  the  remaining  Trustees,  as  soon  as  convenient- 
ly may  be;  and  when  so  met,  the  said  minister  or  preacher,  shall  proceed 
to  nominate  one  or  more  persons  to  fill  the  place  or  places  of  him  or  them 
whose  office  or  offices  has  or  have  been  vacated  as  aforesaid:  Provided 
the  person  or  persons  so  nominated,  shall  have  been  one  year  a  member  or 
members  of  the  said  church,  immediately  preceding  such  nomination,  and 
be  at  least  twenty  one  years  of  age;  and  the  said  Trustees  so  assembled  shall 
proceed  to  elect,  and  by  a  majority  of  votes  appoint  the  person  or  persons 
so  nominated  to  till  such  vacancy  or  vacancies,  in  order  to  keep  up  the 
number  of  nine  Trustees  forever;  and  in  case  of  an  <'(]ual  number  of  votes 
tor  and  against  the  said  nomination,  the  stationed  minister  or  preacher  shall 
Jiave  (he  casting  vote." — Discijilinc,  pages   16;J,4,  rd.  183:3. 

The  above  has  formed  a  part  of  our  Book  of  Discipline  from  the  be- 
ginning; as  you  will  perceive  by  referring  to  older  editions  of  the  Discip- 
hne.  It  is  exactly  the  same  in  an  edition  now  before  me,  printed  in  the 
year  1797,  (the  same  which  contains  the  annotations  of  Dr.  Coke  and 
Bishop  Asbur}'.) 

In  like  flat  contradiction  to  the  Book  of  Discipline,  as  it  has  been  of 
force  from  the  first  organization  of  the  church  to  the  present  time,  they 
elected  a  Board  to  take  the  place  of  the  Church's  Board  of  Trustees;  and 
ordained  an  annual  election  of  Trustees.  It  matters  not  that  they  elected 
the  same  individuals — or  perhaps  it  \\ould  be  more  accurate  to  say,  that 
their  election  of  the  same,  was  a  greater  disrespect  to  the  Discipline,  than 
if  they  had  elected  others;  as  it  seems  to  imply,  not  only  an  intention  to 
sot  up  a  new  "governing  principle"  against  the  old,  but  to  invalidate  the 
acts  which  had  been  performed  under  the  old.  And  when  it  is  remem- 
bered  what  loud  complaints  had  been  made  against  the  Board  of  Trustees, 
to  whose  official  fiults  and  neglects  all  our  disturbances  were  attributed, 
some  special  reason  must  be  supposed  foi'  this  very  special  act.  We  hope  it 
was  done  from  a  conviction  that  the  Trustees  had  been  wrongfully  blamed, 
and  (notwithstanding  the  hue  and  cry  against  them)  were  (he  fittest  per. 
sons  tor  their  <jflice.     So  at  least,  I  believe  they  have  been,  and  are. 

]''ar(her,  we  need  not  remark  on  these  proceedings.  They  are  through- 
out, of  a  character  just  consistent  with  (he  exercise  of  a  hasty  assumption 
ol"  a  power  to  make  ''flif  rule  of  Govrrument  for  the  Meihod'tst  Episcopal 
I'hurrh  inl/irrili/  of  Charleston;^^  im(\  to  repeal  "cr//  former  rules,  usages, 
and  modes  of  viaiiageuind  in  llw  said  I'hurrh,  n'hieh  mnrj  he  rejfiuguaifl  lo 
those  noir  adopted." 
.4 


26 

-Maiiill'stly  the  two  systems  cannot  ^vol•k  togothci".  Either  wo  must  rc- 
l)iidiate  the  authority  of  the  General  Conference,  or  that  which  has  heen  so 
preposterously  set  up  against  it — the  Book  of  Discipline,  or  the  proceed- 
ings of  these  brethren.  The  preamble  to  their  Rules  and  By-laws  covers 
I  he  Avhole  ground  of  churcii  government;  and  may  at  anv  time  introduce 
Rules  and  By-hnvs,  ''repealing  all  former  ndes,  usages,  and  modes  of  man- 
agement," respecting  the  appointment  and  removal  of  the  stewards,  lead- 
ers, and  preachers,  as  easily,  and  with  about  the  same  show  of  right,  as 
now  they  have  acted  concerning  Trustees.  They  have  as  much  right  to 
do  the  one  as  the  other — lo  abrogate  the  echoic  of  the  Disci};line.  as  a  part 
of  it. 

In  the  course  of  the  remarks  which  were  made  against  the  Presiding 
Elder's  taking  the  chair  in  the  meeting  of  the  church  on  the  12th  inst. 
something  was  said  respecting //*er/g/i/ o/'pro/jfr/y,  which  should  be  no- 
ticed  in  this  paper.  It  was  held  that  the  property  of  the  church  belonged 
to  the  members  of  the  particular  society,  separately  from  any  right  of  par- 
ticipation in  the  ministiy  of  that  society,  or  the  members  of  other  socie- 
ties. The  reason  for  noticing  it  here  is,  particularly,  to  correct  the  error 
concerning  the  community  which  the  whole  church  has  in  the  property  of 
a  particular  society.  And  let  me  premise,  that,  there  is  no  room  here  for 
the  introduction  of  such  questions  and  opinions,  as  have  divided  our  people 
in  civil  affairs,  betw-een  the  nationality  of  the  government  on  one  hand, 
and  States  Rights  on  the  other.  No  one  will  pretend  that  the  Methodist 
Church  as  a  whole,  was  formed  by  a  compact  between  a  number  of  sep. 
erate  and  distinct  churches,  w  hich  churches  should  be  on  their  guard  to 
maintain  their  reserved  rights,  against  encroachments  of  the  goveniment 
formed  under  the  compact.  No:  things  sacred  are  not  to  be  admeasured  by 
tilings  profane;  and  if  they  were,  there  is  no  imaginable  resemblance,  con- 
nection or  dependence,  between  the  origin  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church,  and  that  of  our  civil  government.  From  the  time  that  Philip  Em- 
bury formed  the  first  Methodist  Society  in  New  York,  in  1766,  down  to 
the  present  time,  Methodism  has  been  one  and  the  same  thing,  only  increas- 
ing and  ext<»iding  itself  on  every  side.  (And,  without  resi)ect  to  the  case 
before  us,  it  is  worthy  of  rcmembraiice,  that  as  the  first  IMethodist  Society 
was  formed  by  Philip  Endniry,  as  the  fruit  of  God's  blessing  on  his  minis- 
try, and  did  not  first  constitute  itself  a  Methodist  Society,  and  then  employ 
him  to  preach,  so  until  now  when  we  are  not  one  preacher  only,  or  one 
society  only,  but  thousands  of  preachers  and  thousands  of  societies,  there 
never  has  been  a  single  Metliodist  society  formed  in  any  other  way.  In 
no  one  place  did  ever  the  people  meet  and  form  themselves  hito  a  Metho- 
dist Society;  but  the  preachers  have  gone  forth  in  the  name  of  the  Lord, 
and  preaching  Jesus  willi  the  power  of  the  spirit,  have  gathered  them  to- 
gether, by  ones,  or  twos,  or  tens,  as  God  blessed  them,  into  the  church. — 
The  r>Ielhodist  Church  then,  as  plainly  derives  from  the  Methodist  ministry, 
as  faith  coineth  by  hearing,  or  Paul  jjlanted  the  churches  ofGalatia.) — 
At  first,  all  tlie  Methodists  formed  one  class,  or  society;  and  after- 
wards, as  they  who  preached  the  word  went  every  where,  more  and 
more  societies  were  formed.  And  so  at  first  there  was  but  one  circuit,  ono 
conference,  and  subsequently,  more  from  the  nature  of  the  case.  There 
jiever  was  any  other  reason  why  all  the  Methodists  on  the  continent  might 
itr.t  flirni  oiif  single  society,  and  meet  in  one  class,  and  all  the  ministers  in 


27 

one  conference,  but  this  one  reason  only,  that  there  were  too  many,  and  tow 
far  apart.  And  for  this  same  reason  that  our  thousands  of  ministers,  and 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  members  cannot  preach  in  one  pulpit,  and  worship 
in  one  house,  we  have  many  pulpits  and  many  houses  of  worship.  The 
j)roperty  of  any  particular  house  of  worship  vests.iu  the  particular  spcietv 
M'ho  build  it,yor  the  use  for  which  it  is  buiUl  The  right  goes  inseparably 
with  the  use,  and  this  use  recognizes  the  unity  of  Methodism,  and  the  com- 
munity  of  the  members  of  its  whole  family.  But  it  is  objected  that  all  the 
members  of  this  family  are  not  minors;  that  some  have  made  themselves  of 
age  by  getting  an  act  of  incorporation  from  the  State  Legislature.  Be  it 
so,  but  still,  if  such  grown  up  members  of  the  family  make  a  use  of  their 
majority  agaiust  the  natural  and  inalienable  affinity  of  the  rest  of  the  family, 
then  do  they  estrange  and  separate  themselves  from  the  family,  and  can  no 
longer  be  identified  as  members  of  it. 

The  society  at  A.  (whether  incorporated  or  not,  for  we  are  speaking   of 
what  obtains  under  the  economy  of  Methodism)  has   the    right  of  property 
to  the  meeting  house  at  A,  agreeably  to  the  uses  proper  to  a  Methodist  meet- 
ing  house.     But  if  a  member  of  a  society  at  Z  should  remove  to  A,  on  what 
account    could  he  become  a  partaker  in  the  right  of  property  to    the  meet- 
ing house  there?     If  the  right  of  property    belonged  to   the   society  at  A, 
without  any  community  between  it  and  other  societies,  it  should  be   neces- 
sary for  that  society  to  pass  some  act  of  its   own,  to  give  to  tiie    member 
coming  from  Z,  a  right  among  them.     But  is  this  the  case?     We  know  it 
is  not,  under  any  circumstances  whatsoever.     The   member  from  Z  needs 
only  produce  to  the  minister  in  charge  of  the  society  at  A,  the  certificate   of 
his  membership  at  Z,  and  by  virtue  of  that   certificate  he    takes   an  equal 
place,  and  equal  privileges,  with  other  members  of  the  society  at  A.     They 
are  bound  to  receive  him,  whether  they  wish  it  or  not,  and  can  no  more  re- 
fuse  him  his  right  of  membership  among  them,  than  they  could  expel  one 
of  themselves  without  a  trial.     But  is  it  objected  that   this  respects  things 
spiritual  and  not  temporal?     The  objection  cannot  stand.     The    Methodist 
Discipline  is  of  two  parts,  spiritual  and  temporal,  which  both  have  the  same 
source  and  agree  perfectly  together.     We  will  illustrate  it  by  an  example 
taken  from  the  practice  of  the  church  in  this  city.     Attached  to  the  Trinity 
and  Bethel  churches,  are  the  burial  grounds  of  the  society  in  Charleston, 
and  certain  charges  are  fixed  for  the  interment  of  strangers  in  those  grounds. 
If  a  man  die,  and  his  friends  wish  his  body  interred  in    Trinity   or   Bethel 
grave  yard,  he  not  having  been  a  member  of  the  church,  the  charges   must 
be  paid.     He  may  have  been  a  near  neighbor,  have  had  wife  or  children  in 
the  church,  but  still  the  charges  must  be  paid,  unless  for  some  special   rea. 
son  (such  as  poverty)  the  Quarterly  Conference  and  the  Board  of  Trustees, 
remit  the  debt.     But  some  one  may  arrive  in  a  packet  from  New-Orleans 
or  Boston,  bearing  a  certificate  of  his  membership    as   a   Methodist   there, 
according  to  the  Discipline, — he  may  die  immediately  on  his  arrival,  with- 
<iut  having  seen  a    member  of  the  church  in  Charleston,  but  on  the  produc- 
tion of  his  certificate  of  nn-mbership,  the  right  of  interment  is  at  once    ad- 
mitted, just  as  if  he  had  been  a  member  of  the  church  here   for  any    length 
of  time.     But  it  has  been  objected  that  this  community  of  interests    might 
make  the  Methodists  of  one  place  liable  for  debts  contracted  at  another,  as  for 
example,  the  Methodists  of  Charleston  liable  for  the  debts  of  the  Methodists 
in  New-York.     Not  at  all.    The  nile  is  a  good  one,  and  it  works  both  ways. 


"28 

As  the  vight  of  the  property  goes  with  its  use,  so  does  theliabilUy  for  dchl. 
.Suppose  thedcht  is  contracted  by  the  Methodists  of  NeM'-York,  to  build  in 
Xcw-York  a  church  for  the  Methodists.  The  debt  belongs  to  the  society 
at  Xf^v."^'r>rk.  riiid  not  at  all  to  that  of  Charh'stori,  because   the    society    at 

Charleston  cannot  use  a  house  at  New. York;  but  if  the  society,  or  any 
part  of  the  society,  of  Charleston,  removef  to  Xew-York,  thev  will  then 
come  in  for  a  share  of  the  debt,  along  with  a  share  in  the  use  of  the  pro- 
perty. 

Recurring  again  to  the  Quarterly  Conference,  and  questions  and  com- 
plaints concerning  the  Trustees,  we  wish  t«  make  some  further  explana- 
tions. At  the  moment  of  proposing  that  the  resolution  concerning  the  re. 
moval  of  the  boxes  should  be  adopted  in  the  shape  of  a  request,  and  not 
imqualified  direction  to  the  Board  of  Trustees,  I  was  asked  by  the  mover 
of  the  resolution  a  question  to  this  effect — whether  the  Quarterly  Confe- 
rence  had  the  right  to  put  the  Trustees  out  of  office  for  disobeying  an  order 
of  the  Conference.  I  do  not  remember  the  very  words  of  the  question, 
but  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  the  above  was  its  import.  Nor  do  I 
remember  in  what  words  I  made  the  answer,  but  it  was  to  this  effect,  that 
it  might  be  doubted  whether  the  Quarterly  Conference  had  a  right  to  put 
them  out  of  office.  Some  misapprehension,  I  believe,  exists,  as  to  the  pre. 
<'ise  meaning  I  intended  to  convey.  The  occasion  of  the  question's  being 
asked,  ought  in  reason,  as  I  think,  to  he  allowed  some  weight  in  fixing  the 
application  of  the  answer.  For  an  offence  vhich  should  consist  barely 
and  alone  in  neglecting  to  do  what  the  Conference  had  directed,  or  even 
lor  peremptorily  refusing  to  do  it,  without  any  thing  proved  or  apparent 
against  the  motives  or  trustworthiness  of  the  Trustees,  in  thus  refusing  to 
fulfil  the  order  of  the  Conference,  I  should  still  think  it  unwarrantable  in 
the  Quarterly  Conference  to  attempt  such  a  stretch  of  power.  It  would 
fee  unwarrantable,  because  it  would  be  inflicting  the  greatest  possible  pun- 
ishment,  for  what  certainly  ought  not  to  be  considered  by  the  Quarterly 
Conference  the  greatest  of  offences.  The  Discipline  makes  the  Trustees 
responsible  to  the  Quarterly  Conference;  not  because  it  is  jealous  for  the 
dignity  of  that  body,  but  because  it  judges  it  to  be  suitably  qualified  to 
guard  and  care  for  the  interests  of  the  church.  An  offence  therefore,  foi* 
Avhich  Trustees  should  deserve  to  be  put  out  of  office,  should  be  one  against 
fhe  interests  of  the  churchj-  for  which  they  are  in  trust — against  the  trust 
they  hold,  and  not  against  the  dignity  of  the  Quarterly  Conference.  The 
I'ight  of  the  Quarterly  Conference  to  put  the  Trustees,  or  any  one  of  them, 
out  of  ofllice,  rests  alone  upon  inference  as  to  what  properly  belongs  to  the 
meaning  of  the  word  "re^o?w'6Ze,"  in  the  following  sentence,  viz.  "T/je 
Board  of  Trustees  of  every  Circuit  or  Station,  shall  he  respoxsiule  to  tJie 
Quarterly  Meeting  Covferencc  of  said  Ciraiit  or  Station;  and  shall  be  re- 
<]uired  to  present  a  report  of  its  acts  during  the  preceding  year."  There  is 
pot  another  word  in  the  book  of  Discipline  touching  the  case.  Perhaps 
there  ought  to  be.  I  am  myself  inclined  to  think  it  would  be  belter  to 
have  the  rule  more  explicit.  Taking  it,  however,  as  we  have  it,  I  will 
briefly  give  my  views,  on  close  reflection,  of  the  case.  The  responsibility 
of  one  person  or  body,  to  another  person  or  body,  necessarily  implies  adu- 
ty  in  the  former  to  answer  to  the  latter,  and  a  right  in  the  latter  to  require 
the  former  to  answer,  in  tliose  things  for  which  the   one   is  responsible  to 


29 

tlie  other.  This  is  resjjonsibilit)',  and  nothing  more  nor  less  than  this  be- 
longs to  the  word.  For  all  the  rest,  we  are  left  to  inference.  We  infer 
that  a  neglect  of  duty,  or  i-efusal  to  do  it,  deserves  punishment,  and  that 
when  punishment  is  deserved,  it  ought  to  be  intlicted,  and  if  inflicted  at  all, 
it  ought  to  be  by  the  person  or  body  having  cognizance  of  the  case.  So 
also  we  infer,  that  the  person  or  body  holding  such  cognizance,  has  the 
right  to  do  what  shall  be  found  necessary  to  be  done,  in  order  to  secure 
the  fulfilment  of  the  duty  of  the  person  or  body  made  responsible.  All  this 
is  reasonable  and  necessary.  But  a])plying  these  principles  to  the  case  in 
hand,  (and  we  know  of  no  others  that  could  apply)  how  far  do  they  carry 
tis  towards  the  conclusion,  that  the  Quarterly  Conference  has  the  right  to 
put  the  Trustees  out  of  office?  The  farthest  thcj-  can  go,  as  we  conceive, 
is  to  this  extent — viz:  The  Trustees  being  made  responsible  to  the  Quar- 
terly  Conference,  and  to  no  body  else,  for  the  faithful  discharge  of  their 
trusts,  that  body  ought  to  have  power  to  do  whatever  is  necessary  to  be 
done  to  prevent  any  breach  of  the  trust.  And  if  it  appears,  on  evidence  so- 
berly considered,  that  nothing  short  of  putting  the  Trustees  out  of  office 
will  reach  the  case,  and  prevent  a  breach  of  trust, — the  Quarterly  Confe- 
rence ought  to  ha\  c  power  to  do  it.  If  there  be  a  doubt  as  to  the  render- 
ing of  the  rule  in  the  case,  whether  it  conveys  the  power  or  not,  the  Bish- 
ops are  the  authority  for  resolving  that  doubt. 

The  rule  which  fixes  the  responsibility  of  the  Trustees  to  the  Quarterly 
Conference,  was  put  into  the  Book  of  Discipline  by  the  General  Conference 
of  1828.  Previously  to  that  time,  there  was  no  provision  on  the  subject; 
and  we  were  left  to  infer  from  the  general  order  of  our  economy,  to  whom 
their  responsibility  ought  to  beheld.  In  1825  and  182G,  much  and  often 
was  the  subject  agitated;  (as  I  believe  it  was  before  and  has  been  since;) 
but  except  from  the  Trustees*  themselves,  I  never  heard  of  its  being  hinted, 
much  less  urged,  that  they  ought  to  be  held  responsible  to  the  Corporation. 
I  myself  insisted,  with  all  the  rest  of  the  official  members,  that  the  inference 
from  the  analogy  of  our  institutions  was  clear  and  strong  to  require  them 
to  account  to  the  Quarterly  Conference.  Bishop  Andrew,  then  our  Presi- 
ding Elder,  did  the  same,  and  Bishop  M'Kendree  the  same;  and  brethren 
know,  that  when  the  Trustees  spaki;  of  being  responsible  to  the  Corpora- 
tion, they  got  little  more  credit  for  it  than  if  they  had  been  guilty  of  a  wil- 
ful evasion.  But  all  that  time,  it  was  taken  for  granted  by  all  of  us,  (with- 
out investigating  the  case)  that  the  Act  of  Incorporation  of  1787  was  of 
force;  and  that  it  comprehended  all  the  male  members  of  the  church.  Why 
then  were  not  the  Trustees  allowed  their  claim  of  responsibility  to  the 
Corporation,  and  not  to  the  Quarterly  Conference?  For  these  two  good 
reasons.  1st.  We  were  not  then  dissatisfied  with  the  government  of  the 
church,  and  were  willing  to  shape  our  views  of  Discipline  by  the  Book  of 
Discipline.  And  2dly.  The  thing  was  manifestly  too  inconvenient.  Un- 
less  on  some  special  excitement,  a  meeting  could  hardly  be  formed  barely 
to  receive  a  report  about  bricks,  and  wood,  and  paint.  Look  to  the  thin 
attendance  at  other  meetings,  and  it  will  appear  reasonable  to  conclude 
that  the  responsibility  is  best  where  it  is. 

But  it  has  been  urged  that  the  Trustees  refuse  to  be  responsible  to 
THE  QuARTEKLY  CONFERENCE.     We  might  briefly  reply,  that  a   reference 

*  Perhaps  it  is  due  to  the  Trustees  to  say  they  have  expressed  a  persuasion  that   thfefa 
..is  a  mistake  here.     Tliey  say  they  did  not  hold  a»  I  understood  they  did. 


30 

to  their  minutes  concerning  the  request  of  the  Conference  about  the  boxes, 
refutes  the  charge.  The  Trustees  did  refuse  to  be  responsible  to  the  Quar- 
terly Cotiforence.  ir/'ore // «vw  jra^e  o /v//r  (if  the  Discipliiir.  lu-r  >kvi:k 
SINCE.  Still,  it  is  complained  that  they  neglect  to  make  their  annual  re- 
ports to  the  Quarterly  Conference.  Once,  or  perhaps  twice,  since  the  Dis- 
cipline required  it  to  be  done,  they  failed  to  make  a  report;  but  a  failure,  or 
neglect  to  rejjort,  does  not  amount  to  a  refusal  to  report.  We  are  also  free 
to  admit,  that  the  reports  which  have  been  made,  were  not  as  formal  and 
minute  as  might  have  been  desired.  But  what  does  that  signify?  The 
fact  of  their  reporting«t  all,  evidences  their  desire  to  give  satisfaction;  and 
that  their  reports  have  not  been  drawn  up  just  to  our  liking,  may  possibly 
prove  as  much  as  this — that  we  are  not  easily  pleased  with  what  thev  do. 
The  only  instance  that  has  occurred,  in  my  knowledge,  of  their  not  report- 
ing, was  last  year;  and  then  it  was  their  misfortune,  and  not  their  fault. — 
The  Board,  early  in  the  year,  had  been  reduced  to  six  members;  and  though 
repeated  attempts  were  made  to  form  a  meeting,  they  could  not  do  so,  on 
account  of  the  infirmities,  or  absence  from  the  city,  of  two  of  their  body. — 
The  Treasurer  of  the  Board,  however,  exhibited  to  the  Conference  a  state- 
ment of  the  funds,  and  the  expenditures  of  the  year.  Let  us  have  a  care 
that  we  do  our  brethren  no  wronii. 


To  those  of  you,  brethren,  who  were  concerned  in  the  measures  of  the 
meeting,  so  unhappy  for  us  all,  we  desire  to  draw^  near,  and  remonstrate, 
and  commune  with  you,  out  of  our  hearts.  You  have  not  wronged  us  at 
all — or  w^e  forgive  the  wrong.  We  have  no  sense  of  dignity,  of  character, 
of  interest — no  feeling  for  oui'selves  so  dear  to  us  as  you  are.  We  carry 
our  appeal  into  your  own  Ijosoms  for  our  love  of  you.  AVe  will  be  judged 
by  the  record  of  your  own  love  towards  us.  You  have  loved  us  because 
we  loved  the  church.  You  have  honored  us  because  you  judged  us  faith- 
ful. Let  us  then  still  be  faitliful,  that  we  may  still  be  honored  by  you.  Let  us 
know  no  compromise  with  the  flesh — no  shrinking  from  our  duty,  even 
FOR  YOUK  SAKES.  The  thing  that  is  right,  let  us  do  it,  though  our  hearts 
bleed  within  us  at  the  rebukes  we  inflict.  Why  would  you  not  hear  us 
when  we  told  you  our  conscience  was  off*ended?  There  was  no  appealing 
from  conscience,  and  you  forced  us  away  from  among  you.  Alas  for  the 
conceit  of  the  Act  of  Incorporation,  lou  seemed  to  think  you  could  vote 
it  to  yourselves,  whether  being,  or  not  being.  You  were  sadly  misled. — 
The  deeds  and  records  were  with  us,  and  we  were  advised  of  their  impor- 
tance to  the  case.  We  wanted  the  church  to  take  measures  for  the  settle- 
ment of  the  question  of  incorporation,  first;  and  when  it  should  be  found 
that  the  members  were  a  body  corporate,  then  would  be  soon  enough  for  a 
meeting  of  the  Corporation.  And  why,  if  you  could,  should  you  enact  the 
subversion  of  the  Discipline?     But  we  have  done. 

Dear  brethren,  let  these  conflicts  come  to  a  perpetual  end.  Make  liaste 
to  reject  them,  and  retrieve  the  church's  peace.  Let  your  ministers  pass 
their  nights  in  sleep,  and  take  their  daily  food  as  other  men.  Henceforth 
let  there  be  no  provocation  among  us,  but  to  love  one  another;  and  no  stri- 
ving among  us,  except  for  the  faith  of  the  Gospel.  And  may  God,  even 
our  own  God  bless  you. 

We  subjoin  the  answer  of  the  Board  of  Trustees  to  the  notificatibn  thej' 
received  of  their  appointment  by  the  meeting,  which  claimed  to  act  as  the 


31 

corporation  of  the  church;  and  also  the  opinion  of  the  Attorney  General. — 
With  respect  to  the  last  mentioned  document,  vc  will  say  to  you,  that,  if 
time  and  convenience  liad  permitted,  we  would  have  submitted  both  it  and 
the  deeds  and  records  of  the  church,  to  some  other  distinguished  gentlemen 
of  the  bar.  for  their  concurrence — such  as  Major  Axson,  Mr.  Petigru,  and 
Mr.  Dunkia — but  there  was  not  time.  We  are  authorised  to  say,  however, 
that,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Attorney  General,  if  our  brotluen  had  the  advice 
of  any  legal  man  for  their  course,  thai  advice  must  have  been  given  with- 
out access  to  the  evidence  furnished  in  the  Records  of  the  Church;  and 
that  with  the  deeds  and  records  before  him,  no  lawyer  could  conclude  that 
the  members  of  the  Methodist  Church  in  this  city,  arc    a  body  corporate. 

I  am,  beloved  brethren,  vour  most  sincerely  alfectionate,  and  undeserv- 
ingly faithful  pastor,  "  WILLIAM  CAPERS. 

November  28th,  1833. 


We  believe  that  the  facts  contained  in  the  foregoing  papers,  are  faithfully 
and  truly  set  forth  as  they  transpired; — and  we  approve  of  the  reasonings, 
and  concur  in  the  sentiments  of  brother  Capers   respecting  those  tacts. 

HENRY   BASS. 

REDDICK  PIERCE. 

•JOSEPH  HOLMES. 

H.  A.  C.  WALKER. 


CHARLESTON,  Nov.  22,  1833. 
To  W.  W.  Godfrey, 

Secrctari/,  and  others  concerned. 
We  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  jour  notice,  of  our  appointment  as  Trustees,  by  a 
meeting  of  certain  members  of  the  Church,  calling  themselves  the  Corporation  of  the 
Church,  held  on  the  12th  inst. 

We  do  consider  this  meet'mg  and  all  its  proceedings,  illegal,  and  of  no  force,  and  we 
cannot  in  any  form  or  way  acknowledge  it,  as  having  any  legal  authority,  to  appoint,  or 
elect,  or  control  us;  nor  can  we,  or  will  we,  acknowledge  their  authority. 

We  hold  our  otiice,  and  are  in  Trust  for  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  and  we  in- 
tend to  hold  and  maintain  said  olfice  and  said  trust,  for  the  aforesaid  purpose,  agreeable 
to  the  Discipline;  and  we  hold  ourselves  responsible  to  the  Quarterly  Meeting  Confer- 
ence, to  whom  we  feel  it  a  duty,  as  well  as  our  wish,  to  give  all  possible  satisfaction. 

We  cannot,  as  honest  men,  betray  the  trust  reposed  in  us.     With  this  notice,  we  have 
transmitted  to  you  a  copy  of  the  Opinion  of  the  Attorney  General,  R.  Barnwell  Smith, 
Esq.  and  also  the  concurring  opbion  of  Thomas  S.  Grimke,Fs({. 
Signed, 

ABEL  McKEE,  •)  ^ 

SAMUEL  J.  WAGNER,  I  "^  .2 

GEORGE  CHRITZBURG.      |   a^rS'-S 
CHARLES  PRINCE.  }•  S    •  k 

GEORGE  JUST,  .^  ^  jS 

SAMUEL  SEYLE,  a  Is  ^ 

HENRY  MUCKINFUSS,        J  ^ 


NOVEMBER  18,  1833. 
OPINION. 

On  the  12th  day  of  November,  1833,  certain  members  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  in  Charleston,  assembled  together;  and  under  the  assumption  that  they  were  the 
Incorporated  Members  of  the  Methodist  Church,  according  to  the  act  of  Incorporation; 
passed  27th  March,  A.  D.  1787,  they  proceeded  to  pass  by-laws,  and  elect  officers.  By 
the,  3d  Article  of  these  by-laws,  a  certain  number  of  Trustees  are  appointed;  and  it  is 


32 

provided,  that  "tlipy  sliall  keep  the  Churches.  Parsonage?,  and  Houses,  bcloiigiug  to  thr 
Church  in  repair,  and  receive  all  rents,  fees  of  interment.  &c." — and  that  "ihey  shall 
elect  two  Sextons,  one  for  Trinity  Churcli,  and  one  for  Bethel,  who  sliall  account  to  the 
Board  for  all  money  that  shall  come  into  their  hands  for  interments."  In  the  ^th  .Arti- 
cle of  these  by-laws,  an  Executive  Committee  is  organised,  who  "shall  have  authority 
to  authorise  the  purchase  or  sale  of  any  property  (the  Chapels  excepted)  as  thev  shall 
judge  most  expedient."  By  these  claases  it  is  plain,  that  the  control  and  ownership  of 
all  the  property  appertaining  to  the  Methodist  Denomination  in  Ch.irleston  is  claimed. 

By  another  .Article  of  these  liy-laws,  the  Discipline  and  forms  of  the  Methodist  Cliurch 
are  formally  adopted.  The  right  to  adopt,  implies  the  right  to  reject;  consciiuontlv  tlie 
whole  Discipline  of  the  Methodist  Church,  as  well  as  its  property,  depends  upon  the 
question,  whether  tlie  proceedings  of  the  meeting  on  the  12th  inst.  are  legal,  and  those 
"present  properly  exercise  the  rights  they  claim.  In  investigating  the  question,  I  will 
consider — 

1st.  Whether  the  individuals  who  composed  this  meeting,  are  legally  the  corporators 
under  the  act  of  17S7. 

2nd.  Whether  the  Corporation  under  the  act  of  1787,  is  legally  in  existence. 

3rd.  To  whom  do  the  Churches  in  Charleston,  and  the  property  appertaining  to  them, 
belong. 

First.  By  the  Act  of  1787,  "the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  Charleston,"  is  de- 
clared to  be  incorporated,  with  several  other  churches,  "and  by  their  said  respective 
names  shall  severally  have  perpetual  succession  of  officers  and  tneviber.s,-dnd  a  com- 
mon seal,  &c."  but  no  individuals  are  mentioned  in  the  act,  as  incorporated,  it  is  clear 
that  a  Corporation  cannot  exist  without  members;  and  usually,  the  names  of  the  indi- 
viduals incorporated  together,  are  expressed  in  the  charter;  but  where  this  is  omitted  or 
neglected  in  the  -Act  of  Incorporation,  those  who  petitioned  for  the  charter,  by  the  peti- 
tion being  granted,  must  be  considered  as  the  original  members  of  the  Corporation.  It  is 
an  incident  to  a  Corporation  to  choose  new  members,  though  no  power  be  given  by  the 
charter — Com.  iv.  489.  Dub.  12.  Co.  121.  The  original  petitioners,  therefore,  under 
this  act,  formed  the  Corporation,  with  the  right  of  perpetuating  themselves  bv  ordaining 
a  criterion  of  membership,  and  providing  for  a  succession  of  members  by  election  or  oth- 
erwise. Let  us  now  apply  these  principles  to  the  facts  of  the  case  before  us.  If  I  am 
correctly  informed,  there  is  no  evidence  to  show  who  the  original  petitioners  for  the  Act 
of  Incorporation  were.  Their  names  are  unrecorded  and  unknown — and  to  affirm  that 
the  male  communicants  of  the  Church  in  1787  were  these  petitioners,  is  an  assumption 
without  a  particle  of  evidence,  written  or  oral,  to  support  it.  Admitting,  however,  these 
facts  to  be  so — as  there  is  no  evidence  of  their  having  a  "perpetual  succession  of  offi- 
cers and  members,"  the  charter  must  undoubtedb  be  dead  with  the  original  members. 
It  is  laid  down,  "if  all  the  members  of  an  aggregate  corporation  die,  the  body  corporate 
is  dissolved." — 31  Bac.  Role  Abr.  514.  A  corporation  created  by  charter,  as  well  as  by 
act  of  the  Legislative  power,  may  forfeit  its  franchises  by  non-feasance  or  mal-feasance. 
Com.  4,  500.  The  Commonwealth  vs.  the  Union  Fire  and  .Marine  Insurance  Company. 
5  Mass.  230.  So  if  a  corporation  be  constituted  of  Brethren  and  Sisters,  and  all  the 
Brethren  die  arid  all  the  Sisters,  the  corporation  is  dissolved — 1  Role  514,  64.  So 
if  a  corporation  refuses  to  continue  the  election  of  officers  till  all  die  who  could  make 
an  election,  the  corporation  is  dissolved. — Rol.  514.  C.  40.  So  if  a  leet  be  disused  and 
has  no  officers  or  punishment. — Jon.  283.  Nor  is  it  necessary  that  any  legal  proceedings 
should  take  place  in  these  cases  to  produce  the  dissolution;  for  as  Chief  Justice  Ashurst 
says,  "a  scire-facias  is  proper  where  there  is  a  legal  existing  body  capable  of  acting,  and 
who  have  been  guilty  of  an  abuse  of  the  power  entrusted  to  them;  but  that  does  not  ap- 
ply to  the  case  of  a  non-existing  body." — Bacon  2.  v.  31.  in  Notes.  From  these  au- 
thorities I  conclude,  that,  if  it  could  be  shown  that  the  communicants  of  the  Methodist 
Church  in  1787,  were  the  original  members  of  the  Corporation,  they  having  all  died 
without  perpetuating  the  Corporation  by  "a  succe.ssion  of  officers  and  members,"  the 
Corporation  is  dissolved. 

Seco7id.  But  although  the  inonibcrs  generally  of  the  Church  now  existing  cannot  re- 
vive the  Corporation  if  it  be  dissolved,  it  may  be  that  the  powers  of  the  Corporation 
never  vested  under  the  Act  of  1787,  in  the  members  generally  of  the  Church.  The  .sys- 
tem of  government  in  the  Methodist  Church  is  essentially  Ecclesiastical,  and  the  proba- 
bility therefore  is,  that  the  petition  for  incorporation  was  made  by  the  official  members 
of  the  Church,  alone;  and,  consequently,  that  they  alone  were  incorporated  under  the 


^ 


3.3 

Jiamc  oT  "llie  Metliodist  Episcopal  Church  in  Ci.arlfiston."'  The  records  of  the  Cliurcii 
and  Corporation,  seem  clearly  to  establish  this  position.  From  the  vear  1794,  to  the 
present  day,  there  is  not  a  single  meeting  of  the  nienil)ers  generally  of  the  Methodist 
Church  recorded,  much  less  is  there  .any  evidence  of  their  ever  iiaving  exercised  the 
least  control  over  the  property  or  government  of  the  Church.  The  tirst  meeting  re- 
\/  cordedjsjn  1794;  and  there  were  present  tiie  Rev.  Francis  Asljury,  Rev.  Joshua  Ken- 
nonjJohn  IWcTTbvval,  Thomas  .lackson,  and  \\'ni.  Adams.  These  individuals  proceeded 
lo  make  Edgar  Wells,  (who  was  not  present)  .John  .AIcDowal,  Thos.  .Tackson,  and  \\m. 
Adams,  "Stewards  for  the  present  year."  All  the  siihsequent  proceedings  of  the  Church 
and  the  Corporation  appear  to  have  been  conducted  by  this  Ecclesiastical  body,  which 
perpetuated  itself  by  electing  members  to  supply  any  vacancy  which  occurred  by  death 
or  otherwise.  In  the  year  1S0.3,  Trustees  of  the  Corporation  appear  to  have  been  first 
•elected.  The  Trustees  then,  for  several  \  cars,  are  called  Trustees  or  Stewards,  until 
the  year  1817,  when  the  appellation  of  Stewards  to  the  Trustees  appears  to  have  been 
dropped;  and  from  that  time  the  property  of  the  Church,  and  its  temporal  concerns, 
liave  been  governed  by  the  Trustees,  who  have  supplied  by  election  among  tlicir  body 
the  vacancies  as  they  have  occurred  in  conforiuitt^  to  the  Discipline  of  the  Church. 
From  these  Records  of  the  Corporation  and  (Miurcli,  tlierefore,  I  infer,  that  the  present 
Trustees  are  in  fact  the  Corporation,  and  that  they  rightfully  control  the  temporal  in- 
terest of  the  IVfethodist  Church.  Rut  if  the  Trustees  were  not  originally  t!ie  Corporation, 
and  had  no  right  of  perpetuating  themselves  bv  electing  new  metiibers  to  supph  vacan- 
cies; yet,  from  the  long  exercise  of  this  right,  the  law  will  sanction  it.  "  By  iisasc  h 
select  number  called  the  common  council,  shall  choose,  for  there  shall  be  intended  an 
antient  ordinance  for  if. — U.  4.  Co.  77.  Kid.  I  vol.  320 — 29.  So,  "if  the  charter  says 
the  I3urgi!sses  shall  choose  a  ^fayor  de-seipsis,  by  ancient  constitutions  owrf  tisage,  the 
election  of  one  out  of  two  whom  the  common  council  shall  propose,  shall  be  good."' — 
II.  I.Sol.  190.  From  these  authorities  !  infer,  that  the  /f);!^- «snfi:e  existing  since  the 
year  1794,  by  which  the  present  Tnistees  of  the  Church  exercise  their  powers  and 
claim  their  offices,  will  alone  legalize  them. 

Third.  But  suppose  all  these  positions  to  be  erroneous,  and  that  the  individuals  wlio 
assembled  together  on  the  12th  inst.  reall".  constitute  the  Corporation  of  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  which  has  been  revived  by  their  proceedings,  does  the  propertv  of  the 
Church  belong  to  them — or  to  whom  does  it  belong? 

Let  us  first  consider  Trinity  Church.  On  the  7th  da\'  of  April,  1792,  John  Cordon, 
by  deed  of  bargain  and  sale,  conveyed  to  (icorge  Sinclair  Capers,  William  Capers, 
Abraham  Seaver,  John  Combe,  Benjamin  Dorrill,  Charles  Deazol,  Wm.  llutchins,  Jo- 
seph Baker,  William  and  James  Mylne,  the  land  on  which  this  Church  is  built — under] 
certain  tmsts,  with  the  followiiig  proviso:  "And  upon  the  farther  trust  and  confidence  that 
as  often  asanv  of  the  said  Trustees,  for  the  time  being,  shall  die  or  cease  to  he  members 
of  the  society  called  Primitive  .^lethodists,  the  rest  of  the  said  Trustees,  or  of  the  Trus- 
tees for  the  time  being,  or  the  majority  of  them,  as  soon  as  convenient  may  be,  f^hall 
and  may  choose  another  Trustee  or  other  T^-tistees,  in  order  to  keep  the  number  i)f 
five,  seven,  nine,  or  eleven  Trustees  forever."  On  tlie  Plli  day  of  December,  1815, 
the  Trustees  legally  existing  under  the  deed,  coaviixed  TmiTTy  Cliiirch,  wTtTiTts  Parson- 
.•igeT^JC^  to  biSli?)pirAsT)ury  and  McKendree,  Bishops  oTthe  ^fetTiodrsfTTpiscopal  Church 
in  America,  and  their  successors  forever."  It  is  by  this  title  that  this  (  hurch  is  now 
held.     It  is  too  plain  for  argument  that  it  cannot  be  touched  by  these  gentlemen. 

Let  us  next  consider  the  titles  to  Bethel  Church.    The  lot  is  convc  ed  b    Indenture  on. 
the_5thSeptJ7^5,  by  Thomas  Bennett  and   Ann  his  wife,  to  Edgar  Wells,  John  Mc- ) 
T)owall,  Francis  Sutherland,   Thomas  Jackson,  and  William  Smith,    in  tmst  to  build  a  \ 
Church,  &c.  "provided,  nevertheless,  and  it  is  hereby  intended  thai  as  often  as  any  of 
the  Trustees  aforesaid,  or  the  Trustees  for  the  time  beim:,  shall  die  or  cease  to  be  , 
a  member  or  members  o'  the  said  llethodist  I'.piscopal  Church,  then  the  ren.aining  part    ^ 
of  the  Trustees  for  the   lime  being  shall,  as  soon  as  ma\  be  convenient,  choose  another    i 
Trustee  or  T?-ustees,  in  order  to  keep  up  the  'trustees  forever,  who  shall  stand  and  act    ( 
in  behalf  of  the  said  Methodist  Church  as  Trustees  aforesaid."    ]Now,  whether  the  above     j 
named  individuals  were  oflicers  of  the  Church  at  the  time  this  deed  was  e-.ecuted,  is  im-    j 
material.     The  legal  estate  is  ve.sted  in  them,  and  those  they  have  in  snc<!ession  elected, 
and  their  ollices  as  Trustees  cannot  be  Aacated  or  resumed,  until    it  is  shewn  that  they     \ 
have  violated  the  trust  committed  to  them.     If  that  lot  had  belonged  to  the  <  orporalion,     j 
and  they  had  conveyed  it  in  the  above  form  to  Trustees,  the  deed  would  have  been  g.  cd 
against  them.     This  Church,  therefore,  is  Ijeyond  their  control. 


34 

The  deetl  conveying  Cuiiilicrluiid  Cliurcli,  is  not  at  hand;  but  as  it  was  conveyed  be- 
fore the  Act  of  Incorporation  in  17S7,  it  is  obvious  that  no  title  could  have  been  made 
to  the  Corporation,  which  would  vest  in  them  any  ownership  to  the  property. 

All  the  later  deeds  for  property  are  to  the  Trustees  of  the  Church  existing  at  the  time, 
and  will  be  held  of  course  by  their  saccessors,  in  fee  simple.  As  these  Trustees  at  the 
time  (upon  the  supposition  that  these  gentlemen  compose  the  Corporation,)  were  not, 
are  not  now,  and  never  have  been  thtir  otficers;  of  course,  they  could  not  have  taken 
Or  held  the  property  for  them. 

From  the  views  above  stated,  mv  opinion  is,  that  the  proceedings  on  the  l'2th  inst.  are 
without  legal  authority,  and  therefore  without  legal  obligation.  The  property  of  the 
Church,  and  its  management  and  control,  is  vested  in  law  in  the  Trustees  who  now 
hold  it,  free  from  the  intervention  or  control  of  the  members  generally  of  the  Metho- 
dist Church.  Yet  thev  hold  it  in  trust;  and  in  conscience  and  law,  are  bound  to  exer- 
cise the  trust  functions  in  such  a  manner  as  will  best  promote  the  interests,  and  fulfil  the 
desires  of  those  for  whose  benefit  their  trust  was  created — and  the  spirit  of  Christianity 
does  not  require  less. 

R.  BARNWELL  SMITH. 
I  concur  in  the  above  opinion. 

THOMAS  S.  GRIMKE. 

20th  JMovember,  1833. 


Date 

Due 

SEP  q.       '5 

1 

i 

L.  B.  Cat. 

No.  1137 

i 

^87. 6     C477 


23847 


Duke  University  Library 

KEEP  THIS    SLIP  IN  THIS 

POCKET 

Form  336       15M        4-53 


This  book  does  not  circulate 

and  is  charged  for  use  in 
»c-r.^,„  ^^^^^^  building  only 
RETURN   TO   CIRCULATION   DESK 


?.87.e 


e.477 

p 


23847 


